Innovative Approach to Reduce Drinking Issues Among College Students

Young adults, particularly those attending college, are the most likely demographic in the United States to engage in heavy alcohol consumption, which can lead to significant negative outcomes. These consequences can manifest as blackouts, poor academic performance, and various social issues. Additionally, non-drinking students often experience secondary effects such as disruptions during study time, aggression, and the burden of caring for intoxicated peers.

A recent study published in the Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology by researchers at Brown University School of Public Health has introduced a novel intervention known as counter-attitudinal advocacy (CAA). This approach aims to challenge the positive perceptions surrounding heavy drinking and the belief that alcohol is a fundamental aspect of college life.

In a randomized controlled trial involving 585 college students across two different sites, the effectiveness of CAA was compared to the established method of Personalized Normative Feedback (PNF). The study aimed to measure the impact of both interventions on weekly alcohol consumption, peak blood alcohol levels, and the associated negative consequences of drinking.

The research sought to address two critical questions: firstly, whether CAA could effectively reduce alcohol-related risks compared to a control group, and secondly, how it compared to PNF, which has been previously demonstrated to be an effective, low-cost intervention for high-risk students.

The findings revealed that participants receiving PNF reported a notable decrease in their weekly alcohol consumption compared to the control group. Conversely, those engaged in CAA experienced a significant reduction in the negative consequences related to drinking. While CAA did not directly target alcohol consumption, its effectiveness in minimizing harm was evident.

According to the study, both interventions require a brief commitment of just 5 to 10 minutes, making them suitable for widespread preventive measures. The results indicated that while PNF effectively reduced alcohol intake, CAA successfully addressed the problems participants faced due to drinking. Consequently, these two methods can be viewed as complementary, each providing valuable tools for reducing harm associated with alcohol consumption.

PNF operates by illustrating how individual drinking behaviors compare to those of peers, often correcting the misconception that others drink more frequently. This insight can motivate students to adjust their own drinking habits. In contrast, CAA prompts participants to consider the rationale behind avoiding alcohol-related issues, encouraging the identification of specific strategies to mitigate risks.

This approach fosters a non-confrontational environment where students reflect on their choices and generate personal strategies for reducing harm. The process involves verbalizing their responses with guidance from a research assistant or peer, which may enhance the commitment to these strategies through public affirmation.

The necessity for diverse brief interventions is emphasized, as no single method is universally effective for all individuals. By providing various evidence-based options, the likelihood of reaching a broader audience of students, particularly during periods of heightened risk, increases.

The research team, including co-primary investigators from Rutgers University and the University of Houston, expresses optimism that CAA serves as an additional effective strategy, particularly for those who may not respond to PNF.