Motivating Recruitment and Efficacy in Normative Feedback Interventions

Study Results

Results pending

The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.

Basic Information

Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.

Recruitment Status

COMPLETED

Clinical Phase

NA

Total Enrollment

498 participants

Study Classification

INTERVENTIONAL

Study Start Date

2014-09-10

Study Completion Date

2017-08-31

Brief Summary

Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.

Excessive alcohol consumption among college students continues to be a serious public health concern associated with a wide range of negative consequences. Brief computer-based social norms interventions, including personalized normative feedback (PNF), have shown consistent effects in reducing problematic drinking in this population, and there is some evidence that in-lab computer-delivered interventions may be more effective than remote interventions. Most studies have been conducted using generous incentives which may reduce the feasibility of dissemination on a larger scale and may undermine trial efficacy. In accordance with NIAAA aims, this research aims to (a) investigate delivery modality (i.e., in lab versus remotely) and incentives as important factors affecting the efficacy of PNF interventions and (b) develop intervention strategies that facilitate wider dissemination of inexpensive empirically-supported brief interventions for college students, thereby reducing problem drinking during a high-risk time period.

Detailed Description

Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.

The current application evaluates motivational factors associated with recruitment into and efficacy of brief computer-delivered interventions for heavy drinking college students. College students are at increased risk for alcohol misuse compared to other adults, and development of efficacious intervention approaches is an urgent priority for NIAAA. Over the past several years empirical evidence has demonstrated support for computer-based personalized normative feedback (PNF) interventions which correct normative misperceptions of drinking and thereby reduce drinking behavior. Two specific questions which have remained largely unaddressed include whether the effectiveness of computer-based interventions depends on the location in which they are completed, and what is the optimal incentive structure to balance recruitment with motivational biases in intervention trials. A preliminary comparison of findings across several studies suggests that remote PNF interventions may be less effective than in-lab PNF interventions. However, the evidence is not conclusive because no study provides a direct comparison between delivery methods based on random assignment within the same study. This R21 recruited 498 heavy drinking college students and randomly assigned them to a 2 × 2 × 2 repeated measures design. Participants were randomly assigned to in-lab PNF, remote PNF, in-lab attention control, or remote attention control. Participants were also randomly assigned to receive no incentive ($0) or an incentive ($30) for participation. Assessments included baseline, postintervention, 3-month, and 6-month follow-ups. College students' motivational orientations, incentives, and typical drinking are expected to moderate differences between delivery methods. We expect that students who receive incentives for participating in intervention studies will be more likely to participate, but less likely to reduce drinking because they will be more likely to attribute their participation to extrinsic motivation. Further, students who receive computer-based PNF in the laboratory for no incentive are expected to exhibit the largest reductions in drinking. In contrast, students administered attention-control feedback remotely for an incentive ($30) are expected to exhibit the smallest reductions in drinking. Perceived value of intervention, retention of intervention content, and attribution for participation are expected to mediate incentive effects and differential efficacy of in-lab versus remote delivery. This research is expected to yield theoretical and practical improvements to feedback-based intervention strategies with potential to reduce drinking and related negative consequences with a stronger theoretical basis and at lower cost than have been previously available.

Conditions

See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.

Heavy Drinking

Study Design

Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.

Allocation Method

RANDOMIZED

Intervention Model

FACTORIAL

Heavy drinking college students (N=498) participated in a 2 (in-person vs. remote delivery) × 2 (compensation vs. no compensation) × 2 (PNF vs. control) design with follow-up assessments occurring remotely three and six months later.

Primary Study Purpose

TREATMENT

Blinding Strategy

SINGLE

Participants

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Information presenting perceived and actual drinking norms.

Interventions

Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.

Personalized normative feedback

Information presenting perceived and actual drinking norms.

Intervention Type BEHAVIORAL

Eligibility Criteria

Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.

Inclusion Criteria

Reporting one or more heavy drinking occasions (4/5 drinks on one drinking occasion for women/men) in the previous month Reporting one or more negative alcohol-related consequence in the previous month Being between 18 and 26 years of age Being a registered University of Houston student Providing consent to participate in the study

Minimum Eligible Age

18 Years

Maximum Eligible Age

26 Years

Eligible Sex

ALL

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Responsible Party

Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.

Clayton Neighbors

Professor

Responsibility Role PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Locations

Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.

University of Houston

Houston, Texas, United States

Site Status

Countries

Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.

United States

Other Identifiers

Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.

R21AA022369

Identifier Type: NIH

Identifier Source: org_study_id

View Link

Motivating Recruitment and Efficacy in Normative Feedback Interventions

Study Results

Basic Information

Brief Summary

Detailed Description

Conditions

Study Design

Study Groups

Control-Remote-$0

Personalized normative feedback

Control-Remote-$30

Personalized normative feedback

Control-InPerson-$0

Personalized normative feedback

Control-InPerson-$30

Personalized normative feedback

PNF-Remote-$0

Personalized normative feedback

PNF-Remote-$30

Personalized normative feedback

PNF-Inperson-$0

Personalized normative feedback

PNF-Inperson-$30

Personalized normative feedback

Interventions

Personalized normative feedback

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

Sponsors

University of Houston

Responsible Party

Clayton Neighbors

Locations

University of Houston

Countries

Other Identifiers

R21AA022369