Prevention Science

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 83–88 | Cite as

A Controlled Trial of Web-Based Feedback for Heavy Drinking College Students

  • Scott T. WaltersEmail author
  • Amanda M. Vader
  • T. Robert Harris
Original Paper

AbstractObjective: Alcohol consumption has been a growing concern at U.S. colleges, particularly among first-year students, who are at increased risk for problems. This study tested the efficacy of the “electronic Check-Up to Go” (e-CHUG), a commercially-available internet program, at reducing drinking among a group of at-risk college freshman. Method: The design was a randomized controlled trial: 106 freshmen students who reported heavy episodic drinking were randomly assigned to receive feedback or to assessment only. Assessment measures were completed at baseline, 8 weeks, and 16 weeks. Results: At 8 weeks, the feedback group showed a significant decrease in drinks per week and peak BAC over control. By 16 weeks, the control group also declined to a point where there were no differences between groups. Changes in normative drinking estimates mediated the effect of the intervention. An additional 245 abstainers and light drinkers who were also randomized to condition did not show any intervention effect. Conclusions: This study provides preliminary support for the efficacy of this intervention at reducing short-term drinking among at-risk students.


Alcohol Brief intervention Web College students 



This project was supported by a PRIME grant from the University of Texas School of Public Health.


  1. Agostinelli, G., Brown, J. M., & Miller, W. R. (1995). Effects of normative feedback on consumption among heavy drinking college students. Journal of Drug Education, 25(1), 31–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baer, J. S., Marlatt, G. A., Kivlahan, D. R., Fromme, K., Larimer, M. E., & Williams, E. (1992). An experimental test of three methods of alcohol risk reduction with young adults. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60(6), 974–979.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: Freeman.Google Scholar
  4. Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Borsari, B., & Carey, K. B. (2000). Effects of a brief motivational intervention with college student drinkers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68(4), 728–733.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  7. Collins, R. L., Parks, G. A., & Marlatt, G. A. (1985). Social determinants of alcohol consumption: The effects of social interaction and model status on the self-administration of alcohol. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(2), 189–200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Collins, S. E., Carey, K. B., & Sliwinski, M. J. (2002). Mailed personalized normative feedback as a brief intervention for at-risk college drinkers. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63(5), 559–567.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Del Boca, F. K., Darkes, J., Greenbaum, P. E., & Goldman, M. S. (2004). Up close and personal: Temporal variability in the drinking of individual college students during their first year. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72(2), 155–164.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Grabosky, P. N. (1996). Unintended consequences of crime prevention. In R. Homel (Ed.), Politics and practice of situational crime prevention. Crime Prevention Studies, vol. 5.Monsey, NY: Criminal Justice Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hingson, R. W., Heeren, T., Zakocs, R. C., Kopstein, A., & Wechsler, H. (2002). Magnitude of alcohol-related mortality and morbidity among U.S. college students ages 18--24. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63(2), 136–144.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnston, L. D., O’Malley, P. M., & Bachman, J. G. (2000). National survey results on drug use from the monitoring the future study, 1975–1999. Rockville, MD: National Institute on Drug Abuse.Google Scholar
  13. Larimer, M. E., Turner, A. P., Anderson, B. K., Fader, J. S., Kilmer, J. R., & Palmer, R. S. (2001). Evaluating a brief alcohol intervention with fraternities. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62(3), 370–380.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Lewis, M. A., & Neighbors, C. (2006). Social norms approaches using descriptive drinking norms education: A review of the research on personalized normative feedback. Journal of American College Health, 54(4), 213–218.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Marlatt, G. A., Baer, J. S., Kivlahan, D. R., Dimeff, L. A., Larimer, M. E., & Quigley, L. A. (1998). Screening and brief intervention for high-risk college student drinkers: Results from a 2-year follow-up assessment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66(4), 604–615.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Miller, E. T., Neal, D. J., Roberts, L. J., Baer, J. S., Cressler, S. O., & Metrik, J. (2002). Test-retest reliability of alcohol measures: Is there a difference between internet-based assessment and traditional methods? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16(1), 56–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (2002). Motivational interviewing: Preparing people for change (2nd ed.).New York: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  18. Neal, D. J., & Carey, K. B. (2004). Developing discrepancy within self-regulation theory: Use of personalized normative feedback and personal strivings with heavy-drinking college students. Addictive Behaviors, 29(2), 281–297.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Neighbors, C., Larimer, M. E., & Lewis, M. A. (2004). Targeting misperceptions of descriptive drinking norms: Efficacy of a computer-delivered personalized normative feedback intervention. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72(3), 434–447.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. O’Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2002). Epidemiology of alcohol and other drug use among American college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. Supplement, 14, 23–39.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Perkins, H. W., Haines, M. P., & Rice, R. (2005). Misperceiving the college drinking norm and related problems: A nationwide study of exposure to prevention information, perceived norms and student alcohol misuse. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 66(4), 470–478.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Rubin, D. B. (1987) Multiple imputation for nonresponse in surveys. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.Google Scholar
  23. Schafer, J. L. (1997). Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. New York: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  24. Schuckit, M. A., Klein, J. L., Twitchell, G. R., & Springer, L. M. (1994). Increases in alcohol-related problems for men on a college campus between 1980 and 1992. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 55(6), 739–742.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. Turrisi, R., Wiersma, K. A., & Hughes, K. K. (2000). Binge-drinking-related consequences in college students: Role of drinking beliefs and mother-teen communications. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 14(4), 342–355.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Walters, S. T. (2000). In praise of feedback: An effective intervention for college students who are heavy drinkers. Journal of American College Health, 48(5), 235–238.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Walters, S. T., Bennett, M. E., & Miller, J. H. (2000). Reducing alcohol use in college students: A controlled trial of two brief interventions. Journal of Drug Education, 30(3), 361–372.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Walters, S. T., & Neighbors, C. (2005). Feedback interventions for college alcohol misuse: What, why and for whom? Addictive Behaviors, 30(6), 1168–1182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Walters, S. T., & Woodall, W. G. (2003). Mailed feedback reduces consumption among moderate drinkers who are employed. Prevention Science, 4(4), 287–294.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Wechsler, H., Lee, J. E., Kuo, M., Seibring, M., Nelson, T. F., & Lee, H. (2002). Trends in college binge drinking during a period of increased prevention efforts: Findings from four Harvard School of Public Health College Alcohol Study surveys:1993–2001. Journal of American College Health, 50(5), 203–217.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. White, H. R., & Labouvie, E. W. (1989). Towards the assessment of adolescent problem drinking. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 50(1), 30–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Williams, G. D., Aitken, S. S., & Malin, H. (1985). Reliability of self-reported alcohol consumption in a general population survey. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 46(3), 223–227.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Wolber, G., Carne, W. F., & Alexander, R. (1990). The validity of self-reported abstinence and quality sobriety following chemical dependency treatment. The International Journal of the Addictions, 25(5), 495–513.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Prevention Research 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Scott T. Walters
    • 1
    Email author
  • Amanda M. Vader
    • 1
  • T. Robert Harris
    • 1
  1. 1.University of Texas School of Public HealthDallas Regional Campus, 5323 Harry Hines Blvd., V-8, Room 112DallasUSA

Personalised recommendations