A Social Media Personalized Normative Feedback Intervention for Heavy Drinking College Students
NCT ID: NCT05608109
Last Updated: 2025-02-03
Study Results
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.
COMPLETED
NA
401 participants
INTERVENTIONAL
2022-01-09
2024-12-28
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Hypothesis: Alcohol personalized normative feedback, social media-specific personalized normative feedback, and the Alcohol personalized normative feedback+ social media-specific personalized normative feedback conditions will be more effective in reducing drinking than the attention control condition.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Motivating Recruitment and Efficacy in Normative Feedback Interventions
NCT04639882
Testing the Efficacy of a Brief Alcohol Intervention Among College Students
NCT06776796
A Social Media Intervention for Risky Drinking
NCT04721925
Social Media Intervention for Risky Drinking
NCT07251192
CPNF Intervention Development and Testing
NCT07036198
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
RANDOMIZED
PARALLEL
TREATMENT
NONE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)
Participants will receive feedback about their consumption, what they think the average student at their university drinks, and actual drinking statistics at their university.
Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.
Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)
Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) drinking days per week, (b) average drinks per occasion, (c) drinks per week, and (d) drinking percentile rank.
Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)
Participants will receive feedback about their consumption and alcohol related consumption posts, what they think the average student at their university drinks, and actual drinking statistics at their university.
Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.
Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)
Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's alcohol related content posts on social media and drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) alcohol related posting days per week, (b) average alcohol related posting per week, (c) posting percentile rank, (d) drinking days per week, (e) average drinks per week, and (f) drinking percentile rank.
Alcohol and social media personalized normative feedback (APNF + SMPNF)
Participants will go through the alcohol personalized normative feedback process and the social media personalized normative feedback.
Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.
Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)
Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) drinking days per week, (b) average drinks per occasion, (c) drinks per week, and (d) drinking percentile rank.
Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)
Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's alcohol related content posts on social media and drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) alcohol related posting days per week, (b) average alcohol related posting per week, (c) posting percentile rank, (d) drinking days per week, (e) average drinks per week, and (f) drinking percentile rank.
Attention control
Participants will receive feedback about their consumption of desserts, what they think their peers consume, and actual dessert consumption statistics are for individuals in their age group in the United States.
Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey/feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys and feedback interventions at 3-months and 6-months.
No interventions assigned to this group
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)
Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) drinking days per week, (b) average drinks per occasion, (c) drinks per week, and (d) drinking percentile rank.
Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)
Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's alcohol related content posts on social media and drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) alcohol related posting days per week, (b) average alcohol related posting per week, (c) posting percentile rank, (d) drinking days per week, (e) average drinks per week, and (f) drinking percentile rank.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Undergraduate college students 18 to 26 years old
* Meet heavy drinking (4+ drinks in one sitting for individuals assigned female at birth, 5+ drinks in one sitting for individuals assigned male at birth in the past month) and ARC (alcohol-related content) posting criteria (2+ ARC posts in the last 30 days for individuals assigned female at birth, 1+ for individuals assigned male at birth, on either Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, or TikTok)
Exclusion Criteria
18 Years
26 Years
ALL
Yes
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA)
NIH
Duquesne University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Mai-Ly N Steers, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Duquesne University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Miami University
Oxford, Ohio, United States
University of Houston
Houston, Pennsylvania, United States
Duquesne University
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Wallace JM Jr, Bachman JG, O'Malley PM, Schulenberg JE, Cooper SM, Johnston LD. Gender and ethnic differences in smoking, drinking and illicit drug use among American 8th, 10th and 12th grade students, 1976-2000. Addiction. 2003 Feb;98(2):225-34. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00282.x.
Rinker DV, Diamond PM, Walters ST, Wyatt TM, DeJong W. Distinct Classes of Negative Alcohol-Related Consequences in a National Sample of Incoming First-Year College Students: A Latent Class Analysis. Alcohol Alcohol. 2016 Sep;51(5):602-8. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agw036. Epub 2016 Jun 20.
Curtis BL, Lookatch SJ, Ramo DE, McKay JR, Feinn RS, Kranzler HR. Meta-Analysis of the Association of Alcohol-Related Social Media Use with Alcohol Consumption and Alcohol-Related Problems in Adolescents and Young Adults. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2018 Jun;42(6):978-986. doi: 10.1111/acer.13642. Epub 2018 May 22.
Collins RL, Parks GA, Marlatt GA. Social determinants of alcohol consumption: the effects of social interaction and model status on the self-administration of alcohol. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1985 Apr;53(2):189-200. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.53.2.189. No abstract available.
Read JP, Kahler CW, Strong DR, Colder CR. Development and preliminary validation of the young adult alcohol consequences questionnaire. J Stud Alcohol. 2006 Jan;67(1):169-77. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2006.67.169.
Saunders JB, Aasland OG, Babor TF, de la Fuente JR, Grant M. Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on Early Detection of Persons with Harmful Alcohol Consumption--II. Addiction. 1993 Jun;88(6):791-804. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x.
Martens MP, Neighbors C, Dams-O'Connor K, Lee CM, Larimer ME. The factor structure of a dichotomously scored Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2007 Jul;68(4):597-606. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2007.68.597.
Dimeff, L. A. (Ed.). (1999). Brief alcohol screening and intervention for college students (BASICS): A harm reduction approach. Guilford Press.
Lindgren KP, Neighbors C, Teachman BA, Baldwin SA, Norris J, Kaysen D, Gasser ML, Wiers RW. Implicit alcohol associations, especially drinking identity, predict drinking over time. Health Psychol. 2016 Aug;35(8):908-918. doi: 10.1037/hea0000396.
Cooper ML. Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: development and validation of a four-factor-model. Psychological Assessment. 1994; 6(2): 117-128.
Przybylski, AK, Murayama, K, DeHaan, CR, Gladwell, V. Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013; 29: 1814-1848.
Shensa A, Sidani JE, Escobar-Viera CG, Switzer GE, Primack BA, Choukas-Bradley S. Emotional support from social media and face-to-face relationships: Associations with depression risk among young adults. J Affect Disord. 2020 Jan 1;260:38-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.08.092. Epub 2019 Aug 29.
Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, Amtmann D, Bode R, Buysse D, Choi S, Cook K, Devellis R, DeWalt D, Fries JF, Gershon R, Hahn EA, Lai JS, Pilkonis P, Revicki D, Rose M, Weinfurt K, Hays R; PROMIS Cooperative Group. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Nov;63(11):1179-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011. Epub 2010 Aug 4.
Radloff, LS. The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement. 1977; 1(3): 385-401.
Lang FR, John D, Ludtke O, Schupp J, Wagner GG. Short assessment of the Big Five: robust across survey methods except telephone interviewing. Behav Res Methods. 2011 Jun;43(2):548-67. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0066-z.
Hays RD, DiMatteo MR. A short-form measure of loneliness. J Pers Assess. 1987 Spring;51(1):69-81. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5101_6.
Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092.
Andreassen CS, Torsheim T, Brunborg GS, Pallesen S. Development of a Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychol Rep. 2012 Apr;110(2):501-17. doi: 10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2.501-517.
Baer JS, Stacy A, Larimer M. Biases in the perception of drinking norms among college students. J Stud Alcohol. 1991 Nov;52(6):580-6. doi: 10.15288/jsa.1991.52.580.
Sobell LC, Sobell MB. 2012. Timeline Follow-Back. In: Litten R.Z., Allen J.P. (eds) Measuring Alcohol Consumption. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0357-5_3
Zimmerman GL, Olsen CG, Bosworth MF. A 'stages of change' approach to helping patients change behavior. Am Fam Physician. 2000 Mar 1;61(5):1409-16.
Neighbors C, Dillard AJ, Lewis MA, Bergstrom RL, Neil TA. Normative misperceptions and temporal precedence of perceived norms and drinking. J Stud Alcohol. 2006 Mar;67(2):290-9. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2006.67.290.
Kahler CW, Hustad J, Barnett NP, Strong DR, Borsari B. Validation of the 30-day version of the Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire for use in longitudinal studies. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2008 Jul;69(4):611-5. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2008.69.611.
Moussas G, Dadouti G, Douzenis A, Poulis E, Tzelembis A, Bratis D, Christodoulou C, Lykouras L. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): reliability and validity of the Greek version. Ann Gen Psychiatry. 2009 May 14;8:11. doi: 10.1186/1744-859X-8-11.
Earleywine M, LaBrie JW, Pedersen ER. A brief Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index with less potential for bias. Addict Behav. 2008 Sep;33(9):1249-53. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.05.006. Epub 2008 May 13.
Webb GR, Redman S, Gibberd RW, Sanson-Fisher RW. The reliability and stability of a quantity-frequency method and a diary method of measuring alcohol consumption. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1991 May;27(3):223-31. doi: 10.1016/0376-8716(91)90005-j.
Mange J, Mauduy M, Senemeaud C, Bagneux V, Cabe N, Jacquet D, Leconte P, Margas N, Mauny N, Ritz L, Gierski F, Beaunieux H. What really matters in binge drinking: A dominance analysis of binge drinking psychological determinants among University students. Addict Behav Rep. 2021 Apr 8;13:100346. doi: 10.1016/j.abrep.2021.100346. eCollection 2021 Jun.
Arterberry BJ, Martens MP, Cadigan JM, Smith AE. Assessing the Dependability of Drinking Motives via Generalizability Theory. Addict Res Theory. 2012 Oct 1;45(4):292-302. doi: 10.1177/0748175612449744.
Osberg TM, Atkins L, Buchholz L, Shirshova V, Swiantek A, Whitley J, Hartman S, Oquendo N. Development and validation of the College Life Alcohol Salience Scale: a measure of beliefs about the role of alcohol in college life. Psychol Addict Behav. 2010 Mar;24(1):1-12. doi: 10.1037/a0018197.
Xu S, Qiu D, Hahne J, Zhao M, Hu M. Psychometric properties of the short-form UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among Chinese adolescents. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Sep;97(38):e12373. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012373.
Zhong QY, Gelaye B, Zaslavsky AM, Fann JR, Rondon MB, Sanchez SE, Williams MA. Diagnostic Validity of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder - 7 (GAD-7) among Pregnant Women. PLoS One. 2015 Apr 27;10(4):e0125096. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125096. eCollection 2015.
Carey KB, Carey MP, Maisto SA, Henson JM. Temporal stability of the timeline followback interview for alcohol and drug use with psychiatric outpatients. J Stud Alcohol. 2004 Nov;65(6):774-81. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2004.65.774.
Related Links
Access external resources that provide additional context or updates about the study.
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Questionnaire
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2022/05/12
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.