Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: This special section is dedicated to some of the recent work by Dr. Angela Stevens, who passed away unexpectedly last year. She is dearly missed by those fortunate enough to have known her, but her legacy lives on through the lives she touched and her research. Since the beginning of her undergraduate training, Dr. Angela Stevens has dedicated her professional life to improving the lives of people who use drugs and alcohol through research. During her doctoral training at Texas Tech University, her research program focused on risk and protective factors which influence alcohol and cannabis use based on the theory of planned behavior. Dr. Stevens’ master’s thesis utilized daily diary methodology to examine the within-person intention–behavior relation for alcohol use among a sample of young adults (Stevens et al., 2017). This work indicated that individuals higher in phenotypes related to problematic drinking (i.e., impulsigenic traits) had stronger intentions to drink, which in turn predicted higher levels of alcohol consumption. Building on this work, her dissertation (Stevens et al., 2020) involved a psychometric evaluation of a momentary impulsivity scale across two intensive longitudinal samples using ecological momentary assessment (EMA). This work informed the assessment of state-level factors relevant to substance use. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 12 May 2022 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: The articles in the present special section highlight four ways in which our applications of methods, and their harmonization with theory, can hold us back, and each offers an avenue for improvement that brings us closer to our goal of building a cumulative scientific record of the study of addiction. It brings together four articles that are intended to provide new ideas and directions for research on addictive behaviors. It is important for researchers to consider how their study designs, measurements, and statistical tests are specific expressions of the theories they wish to test. Each article illustrates a dimension of the gaps between theory and methods, provides an illustrated example of how to bridge those gaps, and provides easy to follow advice for how to apply these ideas in our own work. By designing for replication (Pearson et al., 2021), considering model-theory harmonization (Littlefield et al., 2021), moving toward plain language interpretation of effects (Halvorson et al., 2021), and thinking of models across levels of analysis (Soyster et al., 2021), we can move toward a more robust, replicable, and impactful science of addictive behaviors. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 12 May 2022 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Objective: Simultaneous alcohol and cannabis use is common among college students and associated with more consumption and consequences compared to single-substance use. This study examined occasions of simultaneous use and compared planned occasions to unplanned occasions with respect to motives, contexts, consumption, and consequences. Method: College student simultaneous users (N = 341; 53% women; 74% White) completed five daily surveys for 54 days. Mixed-effects models examined motives and contexts of simultaneous use occasions as a function of whether alcohol and cannabis use were (a) both planned versus (b) unplanned, no use planned, or (c) unplanned, single-substance use planned and whether alcohol and cannabis consumption and negative simultaneous use-related consequences varied across planned versus unplanned occasions. Results: Social and enhancement motives were related to planned simultaneous use; offered and coping motives were associated with planned single-substance use that became simultaneous use (vs. planned simultaneous use). Compared to unplanned use, planned simultaneous use was negatively associated with using at home or alone, and positively associated with using with others, more intoxicated people, and more people using cannabis. Planned simultaneous use was associated with more alcohol and cannabis consumption. No significant differences were found for negative consequences. Conclusions: Planned simultaneous use was motivated by social and enhancement reasons, whereas planned single-substance use that became simultaneous use was more likely motivated by offers or for coping. Planned simultaneous use resulted in greater consumption, but not negative consequences. Results provide specific motives and contexts associated with unplanned and planned simultaneous use to be incorporated into real-time interventions. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 03 Feb 2022 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Objective: The high rate of statistically significant findings in the sciences that do not replicate in a new sample has been described as a “replication crisis.” Few replication attempts have been conducted in studies of alcohol use disorder (AUD), and the best method for determining whether a finding replicates has not been explored. The goal of the current study was to conduct direct replications within a multisite AUD-randomized controlled trial and to test a range of replication metrics. Method: We used data from a large AUD clinical trial (Project Matching Alcoholism Treatments and Client Heterogeneity [Project MATCH], n = 1,726) to simulate direct replication attempts. We examined associations between drinking intensity and negative alcohol-related consequences (Model 1), sex differences in drinking intensity (Model 2), and reductions in drinking following treatment (Model 3). We treated each of the 11 data collection sites as unique studies such that each subsample was treated as an “original” study, and the remaining 10 subsamples were viewed as “replication” studies. Replicability metrics included the consistency of statistical significance, overlapping confidence intervals, and consistency of the direction of the effect. We also tested effect replication and heterogeneity using meta-analysis. Results: We observed between 0% and 100% replicability across the replicability metrics depending on which subsample was treated as the “original” study. Meta-analyses indicated results were more similar across subsamples with no significant heterogeneity for Models 1 and 2. Conclusions: We recommend researchers focus on effect sizes and use meta-analysis to evaluate the level of replicability. We also encourage direct replication attempts and sharing of data and code to facilitate direct replication. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 26 Aug 2021 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Objective: Problematic alcohol use among college students remains a public health concern; thus, there is a need to understand distinct drinking events, such as unplanned and planned drinking. The present study examined motives and social and physical contexts as correlates of unplanned and planned drinking to help inform prevention and intervention. Method: College student alcohol and cannabis users (N = 341; 53% women) completed 56 days of data collection (two 28-day bursts) with five repeated daily surveys. Three-level generalized linear mixed-effects models were used to examine associations among motives, physical and social contexts, and unplanned versus planned drinking. We also examined whether unplanned or planned drinking resulted in greater consumption and negative consequences. Results: Social and enhancement motives were related to planned drinking, whereas offered motives (i.e., offers of alcohol) and coping motives were linked to unplanned drinking. Drinking at home, with roommates, or alone was associated with unplanned drinking. Drinking at a bar/restaurant, a party, at a friend’s place, with friends, with strangers/acquaintances, with a significant other, or with intoxicated people was linked to planned drinking. Unplanned drinking was related to fewer drinks consumed and fewer negative consequences endorsed. Conclusions: Findings showed that planned drinking—irrespective of consumption—was related to more negative consequences than unplanned drinking. In addition to targeting intentions to drink, the present study provided specific motives and social and physical contexts that are associated with planned drinking that could be incorporated into ecological momentary interventions focused on harm reduction. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 01 Jul 2021 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Objective: Models of addiction often posit bidirectional and dynamic associations between constructs relevant to the etiology and maintenance of addictive behaviors. The cross-lagged panel model (CLPM) is commonly used in addiction research but has been critiqued for not appropriately adjusting for between-person variance. Alternatives to the CLPM have been suggested but remain underutilized. The primary purpose of this article is to highlight interpretational limitations of the CLPM and to provide examples of alternative models. Method: We specified CLPM, Random-Intercept CLPM, and a Latent Curve Model with Structured Residuals using four waves of data from Project MATCH (n = 1,201). We modeled prospective relations among depression symptoms and temptation to drink. Substantive inferences and assumptions across models were compared. Results: The CLPM provided the most evidence of significant cross-lagged paths but the poorest fit to the data compared to other models. Alternative models found little evidence of prospective within-person associations, and more evidence for between-person associations and wave-specific within-person relations between depression symptoms and temptation to drink. Conclusions: This study highlights shortcomings of the CLPM and details alternative models to consider. Addiction researchers should consider alternatives to the CLPM to more optimally delineate relations among constructs across time. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 03 Jun 2021 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Objective: Generalized linear models (GLMs) such as logistic and Poisson regression are among the most common statistical methods for modeling binary and count outcomes. Though single-coefficient tests (odds ratios, incidence rate ratios) are the most common way to test predictor-outcome relations in these models, they provide limited information on the magnitude and nature of relations with outcomes. We assert that this is largely because they do not describe direct relations with quantities of interest (QoIs) such as probabilities and counts. Shifting focus to QoIs makes several critical nuances of GLMs more apparent. Method: To bolster interpretability of these models, we provide a tutorial on logistic and Poisson regression and suggestions for enhancements to current reporting practices for predictor-outcome relations in GLMs. Results: We first highlight differences in interpretation between traditional linear models and GLMs, and describe common misconceptions about GLMs. In particular, we highlight that link functions (a) introduce nonconstant relations between predictors and outcomes and (b) make predictor-QoI relations dependent on levels of other covariates. Each of these properties causes interpretation of GLM coefficients to diverge from interpretations of linear models. Next, we argue for a more central focus on QoIs (probabilities and counts). Finally, we propose and provide graphics and tables, with sample R code, for enhancing presentation and interpretation of QoIs. Conclusions: By improving present practices in the reporting of predictor-outcome relations in GLMs, we hope to maximize the amount of actionable information generated by statistical analyses and provide a tool for building a cumulative science of substance use disorders. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 29 Apr 2021 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Background and Aims: The specific factors driving alcohol consumption, craving, and wanting to drink, are likely different for different people. The present study sought to apply statistical classification methods to idiographic time series data in order to identify person-specific predictors of future drinking-relevant behavior, affect, and cognitions in a college student sample. Design: Participants were sent 8 mobile phone surveys per day for 15 days. Each survey assessed the number of drinks consumed since the previous survey, as well as positive affect, negative affect, alcohol craving, drinking expectancies, perceived alcohol consumption norms, impulsivity, and social and situational context. Each individual’s data were split into training and testing sets, so that trained models could be validated using person-specific out-of-sample data. Elastic net regularization was used to select a subset of a set of 40 variables to be used to predict either alcohol consumption, craving, or wanting to drink, forward in time. Setting: A west-coast university. Participants: Thirty-three university students who had consumed alcohol in their lifetime. Measurements: Mobile phone surveys. Findings: Averaging across participants, accurate out-of-sample predictions of future drinking were made 76% of the time. For craving, the mean out-of-sample R² value was .27. For wanting to drink, the mean out-of-sample R² value was .27. Conclusion: Using a person-specific constellation of psychosocial and temporal variables, it may be possible to accurately predict drinking behavior, affect, and cognitions before they occur. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 22 Apr 2021 00:00:00 GMT
Please help us test our new pre-print finding feature by giving the pre-print link a rating. A 5 star rating indicates the linked pre-print has the exact same content as the published article.
Abstract: Objective: Heavy episodic drinking (HED) and high-intensity drinking (HID) are common in young adulthood but pose unique risks. Quantitative studies have used the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Prototype-Willingness Model (PWM) to understand decision-making processes underlying alcohol misuse. However, our understanding of intentions (plans) and willingness (openness) for HED/HID is in its nascent stages. This study represents the first qualitative examination of relationships between intentions and willingness to engage in HED/HID. Method: We conducted individual interviews among 28 young adult high-intensity drinkers (12 male, 15 female, 1 trans male; M age = 23 years). Interviews focused on HED/HID events with open-ended questions examining: (a) variability in intentions/willingness by occasion and within a drinking event; (b) formation of intentions for consumption and/or intoxication; and (c) interplay of willingness and intentions on heavy drinking nights. Verbatim transcripts were coded within NVivo software and content was analyzed using applied thematic analysis. Results: Participants described intentions and willingness as varying by occasion and perceived their shifting across a drinking event. Intentions for heavy drinking reflected a desired level of intoxication, rather than a specific number of drinks. Willingness, rather than intentions, to engage in heavy drinking/HID was more evident. Conclusions: Findings have significant implications for future measurement work in this area. There may be value in assessing intentions and willingness multiple times per day and during the drinking event itself. We also recommend that intentions for both consumption and intoxication levels be assessed, particularly in studies aiming to examine impaired control. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved) PubDate: Thu, 18 Mar 2021 00:00:00 GMT
Subscription journal
