Do the effects of parent-based alcohol interventions depend on college residence? A short communication.

Parent-based interventions (PBIs) and living at home with one's parents both have been shown to mitigate alcohol risk associated with the first year of college. The current study extends these findings by examining the independent and interactive effects of these two constructs on first-year drinking. The sample included 82 parent-student dyads. Parents were randomized to receive an online PBI that either did (intervention; n = 44) or did not (n = 38) include alcohol-related content in December 2020. Students completed online surveys assessing college residence and drinking (typical weekly and peak) in August 2020 (T1) and February 2021 (T2). Hierarchical zero-inflated Poisson models assessed the main and interaction effects of having a parent in the intervention group (vs control) and living with parents (vs without) on drinking outcomes, controlling for T1 alcohol use. Results revealed that living with parents predicted decreases in typical weekly drinking and having a parent in the intervention predicted decreases in the number of drinks consumed on one's peak drinking occasion at T2. Treatment*residence was also significantly associated with typical weekly drinking in the inflated model. These results suggest that moving out was associated with a greater likelihood of not drinking during a typical week if students had a parent in the intervention and a lower likelihood of not drinking during a typical week if they had a parent in the control application. Together, findings support continued exploration of this online PBI as it appears to reduce peak drinking during the first year of college and reduces the odds of students drinking during a typical week when they move out of their parents' home.

Integrating social media inspired features into a personalized normative feedback intervention combats social media-based alcohol influence.

BACKROUND: Research suggests that the social media platforms popular on college campuses may reflect, reinforce, and even exacerbate heavy drinking practices among students. The present study was designed to directly examine: (1) whether exposure to alcohol-related content on social media diminishes the efficacy of a traditional web-based personalized normative feedback (PNF) alcohol intervention among first-year drinkers; and (2) if social media inspired features and digital game mechanics can be integrated into a PNF intervention to combat social media-based alcohol influence and increase efficacy. METHOD: Alcohol experienced first-year college students (N = 223) completed a pre-survey that assessed exposure to alcohol-related content and social media and were randomized to 1 of 3 web-based alcohol PNF conditions (traditional, gamified only, or social media inspired gamified). One month later, participants' alcohol consumption was reassessed. RESULTS: Among participants who received traditional PNF, social media-based alcohol exposure interacted with pre-intervention drinking such that traditional PNF was less effective in reducing drinking among heavier drinkers reporting greater exposure to alcohol-related social media content. Further, when regression models compared the efficacy of all three conditions, the social media inspired gamified PNF condition was significantly more effective in reducing drinking than was traditional PNF among moderate and heavy drinkers reporting greater exposure to alcohol on social media. CONCLUSION: Although additional research is needed, these findings suggest that representing the population of students on whom normative statistics are based with social media-like user avatars and profiles may enhance the degree to which alcohol PNF is relatable and believable among high-risk students.

Personality Process-Structure Duality: Reply to Two Commentaries.

In two commentaries, Kostromina and Grishina (2018) and Mironenko (2018) offered constructive thoughts and questions in response to an article by Giordano (2018, Culture & Psychology, 23, 502-518) on the merits of an approach to understanding individual personality that focuses on the processes rather than structures of personality. In this reply, the authors seek to clarify some of the points made in the original article. The authors also describe a personality process-structure duality, whereby personality is conceptualized in terms of processes or structures based on the methods used to study it. If the goal is to understand the dynamic and emergent properties of individual personality, the authors continue to argue for the merits of a process-centric approach and the avoidance of structural thinking.