Freshman Alcohol Prevention Project: Correcting Misperceptions through Personalized Normative Feedback

Similar documents
How Do We Choose Our Alcohol Prevention Programs? Fun for the students, sneak in education! Sobering displays. Information booklets.

ADDRESSING COLLEGE GAMBLING: AN EVIDENCE-BASED SCREENING AND BRIEF INTERVENTION

Outcome Report - Alcohol Wise

A Night to Remember: A Harm-Reduction Birthday Card Intervention Reduces High-Risk Drinking During 21st Birthday Celebrations

AWARE Program and Residence Life: A Sustained Model Partnership for Alcohol Abuse Prevention at the University of Wyoming

Reducing Alcohol-impaired Driving: School-based programs Summary Evidence Table

Challenging Community College Alcohol Use. Health Services Matthew Kiechle, MS, CHES, CPP

Sophomore = Wise Fool? The Examination of Alcohol Consumption Throughout Class Years

Traditional Prevention Strategies and the Social Norms Approach

Traditional Prevention Strategies and the Social Norms Approach

Alcohol-Free Programming

CONSIDERABLE RESEARCH HAS EVALUATED

Strategic Planning for Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse Prevention Mississippi Campus Teams. July 27, 2010 Mississippi State University

2014 NDSU NDCORE ALCOHOL AND DRUG SURVEY Summary. Overall Findings

President s Alcohol Task Force Initiatives

Traditional Prevention Strategies and the Social Norms Approach

Best Practices in Addressing Underage Drinking

Perceived Behavioral Alcohol Norms Predict Drinking for College Students While Studying Abroad*

Marijuana. and. Alcohol

A Systematic Review of the 21 st Birthday and Alcohol Consumption Literature

2014 NDSU NDCORE ALCOHOL AND DRUG SURVEY Marijuana Use Summary

The Effects of Descriptive and Injunctive Peer Norms on Young Adult Alcohol Use

2008 Biennial Review North Dakota State University Fargo, ND

2016 NDSU ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, AND OTHER DRUG SURVEY Full Summary. Overall Findings

New Research Directions in Young Adult Marijuana Use, Consequences, and Prevention

TARGETED PREVENTION APPROACHES WHAT WORKS. 1 The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) defines binge or heavy episodic

What is a Drink? I only had one drink. One 12oz Beer One Single Shot 1.5oz One 4-5oz Glass of Wine

ALCOHOL & DRUG PREVENTION & EDUCATION PROGRAM

Southern Connecticut State University. Biennial Review

Party Positive: A Comprehensive Harm-Reduction Program Targeting High-Risk Drinking

Summary of Highlights Tompkins County Spring, 2017

Level of Effectiveness

2012 NDSU NDCORE ALCOHOL AND DRUG SURVEY Summary

Step UP!! Be a Leader, Make a Difference

NSW Summit on Alcohol Abuse August NSW Parliament. NSW Department of Education and Training

Alcohol Edu. Criterion 4 Documents. NCA Self Study. Eric Davidson. Eastern Illinois University Year 2014

A Systems Approach to Improve the Timeliness and Impact of Mandated BASICS Interventions

Recent Trends and Findings Regarding the Magnitude and Prevention of College Drinking and Drug Use Problems

UMass Substance Abuse

University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point Center for Prevention Annual Report

Textsperimenting : A Norms-Based Intervention for College Binge Drinking

BIENNIAL REVIEW OF THE DRUG-FREE SCHOOLS AND CAMPUSES ACT OF 1989:

What do you need to know to reduce your risk?

Directed Reading. Lesson: Understanding Teens and Alcohol WHY TEENS DRINK. Lesson: Alcohol and Your Body ALCOHOL IN YOUR BODY

Ethnicity Specific Norms and Alcohol Consumption Among Hispanic/Latino/a and Caucasian Students

NACURH Programming on the Go DVD Submission Cover Sheet ***Please save this document as: Region_School Name_Program Title

2012 FLORIDA YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE SURVEY. Miami-Dade County

Cincinnati Christian University Drug and Alcohol Prevention Program

The Alcohol Prevention Compass

Managing Changes and Trends in High Risk Behaviors and Issues: An Innovative Collaboration

Same Bottles, Different Stories

Being Controlled by Normative Influences: Self-Determination as a Moderator of a Normative Feedback Alcohol Intervention

Addressing the Driver's Role in Motor Vehicle Crashes: Past Failures, Future Successes

AN EXAMINATION OF HEALTH EDUCATION FACULTY ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS OF ALCOHOL-RELATED BEHAVIORS AND POLICIES IN

A Reality Check. Agenda for Presentation. Myths and Facts About Underage Drinking - Approaches that Make the Greatest Impact

ALCOHOL. Do Now Activity. Fact or Fiction. According to the CDC Alcohol is the most used and abused drug among US youth.

Environmental Prevention Practices

College Drinking Outcomes: A Role for the Alcohol Environment

54% 23% 22% Administrators perceive student marijuana use is on the rise. The MassINC Polling Group 1. October 17, the same

Overview. Rationale. Rationale. Celebratory Drinking. Solutions. Research is emerging 6/9/2011. Barriers

PARENTS AS PREVENTION EXPERTS COLLEGE ALCOHOL CHOICES

Alcohol: Research Driven Responses to Moderate Behavior Dru Simmons, Ohio State University Eric R. Pedersen, RAND

Appendix A: Classroom Fact-Finding Worksheet Answer Key

MOPIP Meeting Nov. 1, Social Norms. Dan Reilly

Heather L. Clinger, MPH, CPS Cathy Sisco, MPA, CPS Sara Wakai, PhD. August 2018 National Prevention Network Annual Conference

file:////dfm-data/odp/shared/web/underage_drinking_files/final%20tabloid_files/final%20tabloid.html[7/1/ :33:15 AM]

Reducing Youth Alcohol Use through Positive Community Norms in Minnesota

2014 FLORIDA YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE SURVEY. South Florida Behavioral Health Network

Division of Student Affairs

Virginia Student Services Conference Wintergreen, VA November, 2014

Beliefs about alcohol and the college experience as moderators of the effects of perceived drinking norms on student alcohol use

STARTING A COMMUNITY CONVERSATION ON UNDERAGE DRINKING

Community Needs Assessment. Circles of San Antonio Community Coalition (COSA)

2014 FLORIDA YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE SURVEY. Santa Rosa County

Assessment Review/Executive Summary for Student Affairs (Complete after assessment)

Issaquah School District. Highlights from the Healthy Youth Survey (March 1, 2015)

ALCOHOL AND YOU Alcohol

PUBH 498 CAPSTONE PROJECT

CORE Alcohol and Drug Survey Executive Summary

Lesson 2 Alcohol: What s the Truth?

SCREENING AND BRIEF INTERVENTION WITH MANDATED STUDENTS: DOES IT WORK?

Dan Reilly and Evan Ramsey

AlcoholEdu for College Executive Summary

2014 FLORIDA YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE SURVEY. Central Florida Behavioral Health Network

Alcohol & Drug Use. Among Louisiana Public School Students. Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance Surveys 2011 & School Health Profiles Comparison 2010:

Biennial Review of High-Risk Drinking and Substance Abuse Prevention Report

CHOICES PRE/POST-TEST

Chapter 10 Section 1 Notes

Composite Prevention Profile: City of Chicago, Illinois

The Maryland Collaborative to Reduce College Drinking and Related Problems:

Exploring College Student Alcohol Consumption Patterns Using Social Network Analysis

David O Malley, Ph.D., LISW Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, Ohio

2014 FLORIDA YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE SURVEY. Escambia County

2/24/2010. Orlando, Florida February 2-4, 2010

Tacoma School District. Highlights from the Healthy Youth Survey (March 1, 2017)

DRINKING AND DRIVING. Alcohol consumption, even in relatively small quantities, increases the risk of road crashes.

2014 NDSU NDCORE ALCOHOL AND DRUG SURVEY Greek Affiliated Student Summary

2016 FLORIDA YOUTH SUBSTANCE ABUSE SURVEY. Flagler County

Evaluating the Efficacy of AlcoholEdu for College

Transcription:

Freshman Alcohol Prevention Project: Correcting Misperceptions through Personalized Normative Feedback U.S. Department of Education s 21 st Annual National Meeting on Alcohol and Other Drug Abuse and Violence Prevention October 18-21, 2007 Omaha, Nebraska Laura Oster-Aaland North Dakota State University laura.oster-aaland@ndsu.edu

Rapid Response to College Drinking Problems Marcia Scott, Scientific Collaborator Roger Hartman, Program Official Laura Oster-Aaland Jane Vangsness Ben Kirkeby Mary Larimer Clayton Neighbors Melissa Lewis Jason Kilmer

History Collaboration with Dr. Neighbors Birthday Card study Tailgating study Writing process with Dr. Lewis Rapid Response Partnership

North Dakota State University Mid-sized land grant university Residential campus Located in Fargo, ND Transition to Division I Athletics Students 50% Minnesota 50% Rural

North Dakota Youth ND 9-12 graders are first in the nation in*: 30 day alcohol use (54%) Drunk driving (27%) Riding with someone after drinking (43%) Binge drinking (40%) *Department of Health & Human Services/Center for Disease Control & Prevention, 2004

North Dakota Adults North Dakota Cities rank high nationally in prevalence of binge drinking* 2 nd Grand Forks/East Grand Forks 17 th Bismarck 20 th Fargo-Moorhead ND adults rank 2 nd in nation in binge drinking (ND 22%, national 16%)** *Nelson, Naimi, Brewer, Bolen, Wells, 2004 **CDC, Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 2004

North Dakota State University Drinking Measures* Average number of drinks consumed per week: 6.51 Annual Consumption: 86.7% 30 Day Consumption: 78.7% 30 Day Consumption (under age 21): 73.9% 5+ Drinkings/Sitting/2 weeks: 53.5% *CORE Alcohol and Drug Survey, 2006

North Dakota State University Prevention Efforts Population level Policy notification Orientation First Year Experience Course Late night options Indicated Choices curriculum, E- Chug, Prime for Life Back on Trac Environmental Campus coalition Community coalition Statewide consortium Server training, overserving ordinance, compliance checks Consistent enforcement, city & university

Freshman Alcohol Prevention Project Why Freshmen? Over-represented in de-tox referrals Over-represented in alcohol related arrests Intervention Personalized normative feedback for first year students No one has examined freshman specific PNF

Social Norms, Alcohol, and Prevention: Perceived norms are among the strongest and most consistent predictors of problem drinking among college students (Borsari & Carey, 2003; Perkins, 2002). Previous research has consistently demonstrated that college students overestimate descriptive drinking norms and the magnitude of overestimation has been prospectively linked with heavier drinking (Baer, Stacy, & Larimer, 1991; Lewis & Neighbors, 2004; Marks, Graham, & Hanson, 1992; Neighbors, Dillard, Lewis, Bergstrom, & Neil, 2006). Personalized normative feedback as a means of correcting normative misperceptions is an effective strategy for reducing college student drinking (Lewis & Neighbors, 2007; Neighbors, Larimer, & Lewis, 2004; Neighbors, Lewis, Bergstrom, & Larimer, 2006).

Freshman Alcohol Prevention Project Participant Screening October 2005 Baseline Assessment November 2005 3-Month Follow-Up February 2006 5-Month Follow-Up April 2006 Normative Feedback and BAC Feedback Overview Freshman Personalized Normative Feedback Gender-specific High BAC Feedback Estimated BAC level.26

Participant Screening Participant Screening October 2005 Baseline Assessment November 2005 3-Month Follow-Up February 2006 5-Month Follow-Up April 2006 Normative Feedback and BAC Feedback First year experience course 4/5 Drinks (previous month) Recruit 300 Heavy-Drinking Freshmen

Baseline Assessment-Feedback Interventions Participant Screening October 2005 Baseline Assessment November 2005 3-Month Follow-Up February 2006 5-Month Follow-Up April 2006 Normative Feedback and BAC Feedback Measures Perceptions Actual behavior Conditions Control Gender-Neutral Gender-Specific High BAC (BAC.26) 22.5% of total participants

Gender-Specific Personalized Normative Feedback

Gender-Neutral Personalized Normative Feedback

High BAC Feedback Thank you for your participation in Freshman Alcohol Prevention Project. As you may recall, we explained in the consent form that we would be reviewing certain types of responses more closely. In doing so, we had some concerns about your drinking activity responses. You mentioned that you had consumed xx drinks in xx hours which, given your reported weight, puts you at a blood alcohol concentration of XX. Reaching this blood alcohol level can be dangerous. Often people do not realize that they are drinking at levels that can place them at risk, and I wanted to bring your attention to this issue. Below is information regarding blood alcohol concentration and the associated physical effects and risks. In addition, we have provided a resource list of services on campus and in the local community for getting more information about alcohol and reducing or preventing negative consequences associated with alcohol use. We hope you will find this information useful to you as a resource. BAC Behavioral Effects.05 feeling of warmth and well-being; mildly relaxed.10 legally drunk; impairment of muscle coordination; driving is impaired.15 obviously drunk; body coordination is seriously affected; vision blurred; speech slurred.20 intoxication strong; significant loss of ability to carry on a conversation and make rational judgments; difficulty walking.25 severe motor disturbance; staggering; sensory perceptions greatly impaired; smashed.30 stuporous but conscious no comprehension of what s going on.35 severe intoxication; loss of consciousness; coma or possible death >.40 breathing and heart action can stop; coma and possible death Share House, Inc.: 701-282-6561 First Step Recovery, PLLP: 701-293-3384 NDSU Counseling Center: Ceres Hall 212, 231-7671 NDSU Alcoholics Anonymous Meetings: Wellness Center, Room168 (3:30 Thursdays and Noon Wednesdays)

High BAC Feedback Researcher verbally gave the participant some additional tips to avoid drinking to such dangerous levels E.g., Avoid playing drinking games, space drinks farther apart, eat a meal before going out etc.

3- and 5-Month Follow-Ups Participant Screening October 2005 Baseline Assessment November 2005 3-Month Follow-Up February 2006 Normative Feedback and BAC Feedback All participants completed perceived norms and drinking measures at both follow-ups 5-Month Follow-Up April 2006

Method - Participants Participant Screening Prescreening of 891 freshmen 437 (48.9%) met high-risk criteria of 4/5 Established drinking norms for personalized feedback Participants recruited for participation 316 participated in baseline and intervention 245 did not receive high BAC feedback (52.2% female, 47,8% male) 230 (93.9%) completed the 3-month follow-up 209 (85.3%) completed the 5-month follow-up

Normative Misperceptions for Freshman Drinking Behavior Multivariate analyses revealed that freshman overestimate the drinking of their freshman peers (p <.001). Moreover, freshman overestimated the prevalence of freshman drinking outcomes at all three time-points for : Drinks per week, p <.001 Drinking frequency, p <.001

Relationship between freshman specific perceived norms and drinking behavior Perceived same sex freshman specific norms are significantly associated with students own drinking, t (311) = 2.24, p <.05. In contrast, regression results indicated that perceived opposite sex and typical freshman norms did not account for unique variance in personal drinking (t s < 1)

Personalized Normative Feedback Both interventions were associated with drinking reductions at 5 month follow-up, p s <.01). Estimated Marginal Means and Standard Errors for Drinking at Five Month Follow-Up by Intervention Condition Drinking Frequency Drinks per Week Intervention Condition M SE M SE Control 2.43 0.13 11.02 0.76 Gender-neutral PNF 1.86 0.14 8.41 0.82 Gender-specific PNF 1.74 0.14 7.97 0.83 For both outcomes both interventions are significantly different from control but not from each other.

Personalized Normative Feedback Both interventions reduced normative misperceptions at 3 month follow-up. Multivariate group differences were evident for both gender neutral, p <.01, and gender specific norms, p <.001. Estimated Marginal Means and Standard Errors Perceived Norms at Three-Month Follow-up by Intervention Group Perceived Gender-Neutral Norms Perceived Gender-Specific Norms Drinking Frequency Drinks per Week Drinking Frequency Drinks per Week Intervention Condition M SE M SE M SE M SE Control 3.88 0.14 18.35 0.73 3.79 0.14 18.67 0.75 Gender-neutral PNF 3.42 0.15 14.78 0.77 3.28 0.15 14.50 0.79 Gender-specific PNF 3.30 0.16 14.30 0.81 3.02 0.16 14.47 0.83 In each case both interventions are significantly different from control but not from each other.

Limitations BAC intervention Confound Excludes extreme drinkers from analysis Generalizability Only study examining freshmen specific feedback Potentially demographically homogenous (to this campus) Internet vs. In-lab

Study Conclusions Additional work is needed to evaluate the potential influence of high BAC feedback. PNF reduced normative misperceptions and PNF reduced drinking among high-risk freshmen. PNF reduced drinking as a function of reducing normative misperceptions (only for gender neutral). Freshman specific PNF is a promising approach to prevention with incoming freshman.

Future Directions Efficacy of Interventions with Freshmen Undergraduates E-chug vs. Normative Feedback (onsite and internet only) Policy will be recommended based on the findings of this study Internet intervention in 189 course? Post-Admission/Pre-Enrollment? Sanctioned students?

Lessons Learned & Advice for Student Affairs Colleagues Collaborate with faculty Understand that researchers and practitioners have differing motives Be patient with the research process Be open to learning Recognize that you have something to teach Push yourself to publish and/or present Act on credible sources of information

Thank You!! Questions? Laura Oster-Aaland North Dakota State University laura.oster-aaland@ndsu.edu www.ndsu.edu/ndsu/alcoholinfo/