Using Counter Attitudinal Advocacy to Change Drinking Behavior

项目总结/摘要 大学年轻人中危险饮酒的持续存在要求继续努力防止伤害 与酒精有关。目前的预防干预措施取得了一些成功，但大多数预防措施都没有取得成功。 干预措施依赖于单一的改变机制：纠正夸大的饮酒规范。我们建议 测试针对另一种改变机制的新预防策略：创造态度-行为 不和谐音到目前为止，改变与酒精有关的态度和由此产生的态度-行为差异， 没有被利用作为预防酒精滥用的行为改变策略。由广泛的 文献显示酒精态度和饮酒行为之间存在强烈和一致的联系，我们 适应了一个简短的反态度宣传（CAA）操纵酒精预防的背景。的目标 拟议的研究是为了证明（a）CAA的效用，以改变大量饮酒和相关的 结果，（B）态度改变和态度-行为不协调介导CAA操纵 效果，以及（c）CAA引起的风险降低不劣于基于以下因素的既定干预措施： 个性化规范反馈（PNF）。为了实现这些目标，我们提出了一对研究实施 在两个网站上。首先，我们进行了初步的调查，以记录同行的行为和规范的看法（N = 500在每个站点），需要提供准确的，校园特定的PNF。接下来，我们进行随机对照试验， 实验条件（CAA和PNF）和第三次评估仅控制条件，以确定 CAA对酒精的结果。对于RCT，我们将招募总共600名重度饮酒的学生，他们支持>2 酒精相关的不良后果在试点工作的基础上，我们设计了一个提示来引发反态度 支持适度饮酒的声明。借鉴大学干预文献，我们还将使用 标准PNF条件作为比较。我们将在1个月、3个月和6个月随访时收集酒精结果。 我们将测试假设，相对于仅评估控制，CAA操纵将（a）增加 积极的适度饮酒态度，（B）减少积极的酗酒态度，（c）增加态度， 行为失调，以及（d）减少每天饮酒量，狂欢频率，BAC峰值和酒精 结果，并增加PBS。我们还将检验CAA条件不会低于 比（即，不劣于）PNF条件在减少每天饮酒量，暴饮暴食频率， 血液酒精浓度峰值和酒精的后果此外，我们还将检验有关参与者特征的假设 （饮酒者身份，对一致性的偏好），这可能会缓和CAA操纵对 饮酒行为。本研究将证明态度改变理论和CAA的普遍性 针对酒精预防背景的方法，以及它们在不同人口统计学背景下的普遍性 设置.对公共卫生的影响包括建立一种新的方法来减少高血压的有效性。 大量饮酒和相关后果的年轻人从事危险饮酒。

PROJECT SUMMARY/ABSTRACT The persistence of risky drinking among young adults in college calls for continued efforts to prevent harms related to alcohol. Current prevention interventions have achieved some success, but the majority of those interventions rely on a single mechanism of change: correcting exaggerated drinking norms. We propose to test a novel prevention strategy targeting another mechanism of change: creating attitude-behavior dissonance. To date, changing alcohol-related attitudes and the resulting attitude-behavior discrepancy have not been harnessed as a behavior change strategy for alcohol abuse prevention. Informed by an extensive literature showing strong and consistent associations between alcohol attitudes and drinking behavior, we adapted a brief counter-attitudinal advocacy (CAA) manipulation to the alcohol prevention context. The goals of the proposed research are to demonstrate (a) the utility of CAA to change high volume drinking and related consequences, (b) that attitude change and attitude-behavior dissonance mediates the CAA manipulation effect, and (c) that CAA-induced risk reduction is not inferior to an established intervention based on Personalized Normative Feedback (PNF). To achieve these goals, we propose a pair of studies implemented across two sites. First we conduct an initial survey to document peer behaviors and normative perceptions (N = 500 at each site), required to deliver accurate, campus-specific PNF. Next we conduct an RCT with 2 experimental conditions (CAA and PNF) and a 3rd assessment only control condition to determine the impact of CAA on alcohol outcomes. For the RCT, we will recruit a total of 600 heavy drinking students who endorse >2 alcohol-related negative consequence. Based on pilot work, we designed a prompt to elicit counter-attitudinal statements in favor of moderate drinking. Drawing from the college intervention literature, we will also use a standard PNF condition as a comparison. We will collect alcohol outcomes at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups. We will test hypotheses that, relative to assessment only control, the CAA manipulation will (a) increase positive moderate drinking attitudes, (b) decrease positive heavy drinking attitudes, (c) increase attitude- behavior dissonance, and (d) decrease drinks per drinking day, binge frequency, peak BAC, and alcohol consequences, and increase PBS. We will also test the hypothesis that CAA condition will be no less efficacious than (i.e., not inferior to) the PNF condition in reducing drinks per drinking day, binge frequency, peak BAC, and alcohol consequences. In addition, we will test hypotheses about participant characteristics (drinker identity, preference for consistency) that might moderate the influence of the CAA manipulations on drinking behaviors. This study will demonstrate the generalizability of attitude change theory and CAA methods to the alcohol prevention context, as well as their generalizability across demographically different settings. Implications for the public health include establishing the efficacy of a new approach for reducing high volume drinking and related consequences among young adults engaging in at-risk drinking.