Efficacy of Counter-Attitudinal Advocacy and Personalized Feedback for Heavy-Drinking College Students

Abstract

Objective: Young adults in college engage in risky drinking that results in alcohol-related harms. Most evidence-based prevention interventions recommended for this population rely on correcting exaggerated drinking norms via personalized normative feedback (PNF). Informed by an extensive literature linking alcohol attitudes and drinking behavior, we adapted a brief counter-attitudinal advocacy (CAA) task to the alcohol prevention context. The goal of this study is to evaluate the ability of CAA in changing drinking and related consequences and to explore the comparative efficacy of CAA versus PNF. Method: This two-site randomized controlled trial had two experimental conditions (CAA and PNF) and an assessment-only control condition. Participants were 585 students who reported heavy episodic drinking and ≥2 alcohol-related negative consequences. Alcohol outcomes were assessed at 1-, 3-, and 6-month follow-ups to test hypotheses that the CAA and PNF manipulations will decrease drinks per week, typical drinks per day, peak blood alcohol concentration, and alcohol consequences, relative to control. Results: Participants reported reductions in drinks per week, typical drinks, and alcohol consequences. Those who received PNF reported significantly fewer drinks per week than controls, whereas those who received CAA reported significantly fewer consequences than controls. The CAA and PNF conditions did not differ from one another. Conclusions: This study demonstrates an application of attitude change theory and CAA methods to the alcohol prevention context, across demographically different settings. The novel CAA task had a harm reduction effect on consequences but not consumption.