Abby L Braitman, Jennifer L Shipley, Megan Strowger, Emily S Renzoni
{"title":"识别大学饮酒的显著社会、环境和情境背景:对饮酒结果的影响。","authors":"Abby L Braitman, Jennifer L Shipley, Megan Strowger, Emily S Renzoni","doi":"10.1111/ajad.70065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Drinking context, such as where, why, and under what social conditions drinking occurs, is consistently associated with daily variability in alcohol use. However, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) requires very brief measurement, not allowing for as many contextual assessments as researchers may like. The current investigation examined common contextual predictors and their associations with different alcohol outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of N = 528 college drinkers completed three surveys about their most recent drinking episode. This included contextual predictors (location, social context, who was present, alcohol offers, and drinking motives), as well as typical drinking outcomes (number of drinks, estimated blood alcohol concentration, perceived level of drunkenness) and high-risk drinking outcomes (binge drinking, blacking out, passing out). The current study used a traditional longitudinal design, allowing for inclusion of longer assessments of drinking than EMA can accommodate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The strongest predictors were consistent across outcome types, including with whom participants were drinking, number of people present, and alcohol offers. Despite consistent significant prediction of outcomes, drinking location accounted for little variance in alcohol outcomes. Social and enhancement motives had stronger links to outcomes in this sample of general college drinkers than conformity or coping drinking motives.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusions: </strong>Although numerous options are available for assessing drinking context, some predictors are more impactful than others.</p><p><strong>Scientific significance: </strong>Findings may help researchers using traditional daily diary or EMA designs focus on the context-specific predictors with the most impact on their outcomes of interest in their limited number of assessment items.</p>","PeriodicalId":7762,"journal":{"name":"American Journal on Addictions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Identifying salient social, environmental, and situational contexts of college drinking: Impacts across drinking outcomes.\",\"authors\":\"Abby L Braitman, Jennifer L Shipley, Megan Strowger, Emily S Renzoni\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajad.70065\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>Drinking context, such as where, why, and under what social conditions drinking occurs, is consistently associated with daily variability in alcohol use. However, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) requires very brief measurement, not allowing for as many contextual assessments as researchers may like. The current investigation examined common contextual predictors and their associations with different alcohol outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A sample of N = 528 college drinkers completed three surveys about their most recent drinking episode. This included contextual predictors (location, social context, who was present, alcohol offers, and drinking motives), as well as typical drinking outcomes (number of drinks, estimated blood alcohol concentration, perceived level of drunkenness) and high-risk drinking outcomes (binge drinking, blacking out, passing out). The current study used a traditional longitudinal design, allowing for inclusion of longer assessments of drinking than EMA can accommodate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The strongest predictors were consistent across outcome types, including with whom participants were drinking, number of people present, and alcohol offers. Despite consistent significant prediction of outcomes, drinking location accounted for little variance in alcohol outcomes. Social and enhancement motives had stronger links to outcomes in this sample of general college drinkers than conformity or coping drinking motives.</p><p><strong>Discussion and conclusions: </strong>Although numerous options are available for assessing drinking context, some predictors are more impactful than others.</p><p><strong>Scientific significance: </strong>Findings may help researchers using traditional daily diary or EMA designs focus on the context-specific predictors with the most impact on their outcomes of interest in their limited number of assessment items.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7762,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal on Addictions\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal on Addictions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajad.70065\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SUBSTANCE ABUSE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal on Addictions","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/ajad.70065","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SUBSTANCE ABUSE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Identifying salient social, environmental, and situational contexts of college drinking: Impacts across drinking outcomes.
Background and objectives: Drinking context, such as where, why, and under what social conditions drinking occurs, is consistently associated with daily variability in alcohol use. However, ecological momentary assessment (EMA) requires very brief measurement, not allowing for as many contextual assessments as researchers may like. The current investigation examined common contextual predictors and their associations with different alcohol outcomes.
Methods: A sample of N = 528 college drinkers completed three surveys about their most recent drinking episode. This included contextual predictors (location, social context, who was present, alcohol offers, and drinking motives), as well as typical drinking outcomes (number of drinks, estimated blood alcohol concentration, perceived level of drunkenness) and high-risk drinking outcomes (binge drinking, blacking out, passing out). The current study used a traditional longitudinal design, allowing for inclusion of longer assessments of drinking than EMA can accommodate.
Results: The strongest predictors were consistent across outcome types, including with whom participants were drinking, number of people present, and alcohol offers. Despite consistent significant prediction of outcomes, drinking location accounted for little variance in alcohol outcomes. Social and enhancement motives had stronger links to outcomes in this sample of general college drinkers than conformity or coping drinking motives.
Discussion and conclusions: Although numerous options are available for assessing drinking context, some predictors are more impactful than others.
Scientific significance: Findings may help researchers using traditional daily diary or EMA designs focus on the context-specific predictors with the most impact on their outcomes of interest in their limited number of assessment items.
期刊介绍:
The American Journal on Addictions is the official journal of the American Academy of Addiction Psychiatry. The Academy encourages research on the etiology, prevention, identification, and treatment of substance abuse; thus, the journal provides a forum for the dissemination of information in the extensive field of addiction. Each issue of this publication covers a wide variety of topics ranging from codependence to genetics, epidemiology to dual diagnostics, etiology to neuroscience, and much more. Features of the journal, all written by experts in the field, include special overview articles, clinical or basic research papers, clinical updates, and book reviews within the area of addictions.