| Title |
Testing an Online, Theory-Based Intervention to Reduce Pre-drinking Alcohol Consumption and Alcohol-Related Harm in Undergraduates: a Randomized Controlled Trial
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Behavioral Medicine, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12529-018-9736-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kim M. Caudwell, Barbara A. Mullan, Martin S. Hagger |
| Abstract |
The present study tested the efficacy of a theory-based online intervention comprising motivational (autonomy support) and volitional (implementation intention) components to reduce pre-drinking alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm. Undergraduate students (N = 202) completed self-report measures of constructs from psychological theories, pre-drinking alcohol consumption, and alcohol-related harm at baseline and were randomly assigned to one of four intervention conditions in a 2 (autonomy support: present/absent) × 2 (implementation intention: present/absent) design. Participants completed follow-up measures of all variables at 4 weeks post-intervention. All participants received national guidelines on alcohol consumption and an e-mail summary of intervention content at its conclusion. Participants also received weekly SMS messages in the 4-week post-intervention period restating content relevant to their intervention condition. Neither statistically significant main effect for either the autonomy support or implementation intention intervention components nor an interaction effect was found on the outcome measures. However, statistically significant reductions in pre-drinking alcohol consumption and alcohol-related harm were observed across all groups at follow-up, when compared to baseline. Reductions in outcome measures were likely related to elements common to each condition (i.e., provision of national guidelines, assessment of outcome measures, e-mail summary, and SMS messages), rather than motivational and volitional components. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 127 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 16 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 11% |
| Professor | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 20 | 16% |
| Unknown | 43 | 34% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 32 | 25% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 17 | 13% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 8 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 5% |
| Sports and Recreations | 4 | 3% |
| Other | 14 | 11% |
| Unknown | 46 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 18 July 2018.
All research outputs
#4,101,472
of 23,339,727 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#215
of 918 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#78,073
of 327,632 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Behavioral Medicine
#15
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,339,727 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 918 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 327,632 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.