Efficacy of a Brief Image-Based Multiple-Behavior Intervention for College Students
- 391 Downloads
Epidemiologic data indicate most adolescents and adults experience multiple, simultaneous risk behaviors.
The purpose of this study is to examine the efficacy of a brief image-based multiple-behavior intervention (MBI) for college students.
A total of 303 college students were randomly assigned to: (1) a brief MBI or (2) a standard care control, with a 3-month postintervention follow-up.
Omnibus treatment by time multivariate analysis of variance interactions were significant for three of six behavior groupings, with improvements for college students receiving the brief MBI on alcohol consumption behaviors, F(6, 261) = 2.73, p = 0.01, marijuana-use behaviors, F(4, 278) = 3.18, p = 0.01, and health-related quality of life, F(5, 277) = 2.80, p = 0.02, but not cigarette use, exercise, and nutrition behaviors. Participants receiving the brief MBI also got more sleep, F(1, 281) = 9.49, p = 0.00, than those in the standard care control.
A brief image-based multiple-behavior intervention may be useful in influencing a number of critical health habits and health-related quality-of-life indicators of college students.
KeywordsBrief intervention Multiple-behavior intervention Image College students Drug use Health quality of life
This manuscript was supported in part by funding from the National Institute on Drug Abuse (grant #DA018872). We thank Dr. Fred Beck, MD, who made it possible to use the campus medical services to recruit students, and Drs. Pamela Chally, Ph.D., and Judy Perkin, Ph.D., who permitted us to implement the intervention in the Brooks College of Health. We also thank Elizabeth Breting, Heather Frost, and Heather Boggess for their assistance in implementing this study.
- 1.Southern Illinois University Carbondale. Results of the core alcohol and drug survey. Available at: http://www.siu.edu/departments/coreinst/public_html. Accessibility verified June 2, 2008.
- 6.Ross SE, Niebling BC, Heckert TM. Sources of stress among college students. Coll Stud J. 1999; 33: 312–317.Google Scholar
- 7.Brown FC, Soper B, Buboltz Jr WC. Prevalence of delayed sleep phase syndrome in university students. Coll Stud J. 2001; 353: 472–476.Google Scholar
- 9.Buboltz WC, Loveland J, Jenkins SM, et al. College student sleep: Relationship to health and academic performance. In: Landow MV, ed. College students: Mental health and coping strategies. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science; 2006: 1–39.Google Scholar
- 10.Jensen DR. Understanding sleep disorders in a college student population. J Coll Couns. 2003; 61: 25–34.Google Scholar
- 11.Krenek RL Jr. The impact of sleep quality and duration on college student adjustment and health. Ph.D. dissertation, Louisiana Tech University, United States—Louisiana. 2006 Retrieved October 18, 2007, from ProQuest Digital Dissertations database. (Publication No. AAT 3203243).Google Scholar
- 12.Grunbaum JA, Kann L, Kinchen S, et al. Youth risk behavior surveillance—United States, 2003. Morb Mort Wkly Rep. 2004; 532: 1–95.Google Scholar
- 14.Albright, CL, ed. Call for papers for a special issue to appear in preventive medicine: Conceptualizing multiple health risk behavior research. Outlook: A quarterly newsletter of the Society of Behavioral Medicine. Fall 2006:14.Google Scholar
- 15.National Institutes of Health. Enhancing adolescent health promotion across multiple high risk behaviors: Program Announcement. Available at: http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PA-02-159.html. Accessibility verified June 2, 2008.
- 16.Society of Behavioral Medicine. Special interest groups: Multiple risk behavior change. Available at http://www.sbm.org/sig/mrbc/. Accessibility verified June 26, 2008.
- 27.Slovic P, Fincuane ML, Peters E, MacGregor DG. The affect heuristic. In: Gilovich T, Griffin D Kahneman D, eds. Heuristics and biases: The psychology of intuitive judgment. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 2002: 397–420.Google Scholar
- 28.Gibbons FX, Gerrard M. Health images and their effects on health behaviour. In: Buunk BP, Gibbons FX, eds. Health, coping, and well-being: Perspectives from social comparison theory. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 1997: 63–94.Google Scholar
- 36.Strathman A, Boninger DS, Gleicher F, Baker SM. Constructing the future with present behavior: An individual difference approach. In: Zaleski Z, ed. Psychology of future orientation. Lublin, Poland: Catholic University of Lubin; 1994: 107–119.Google Scholar
- 42.Martin KA, Leary MR. Single, physically active, female: The effects of information about exercise participation and body weight on perceptions of young women. Soc Behav Pers. 2001; 162: 1–12.Google Scholar
- 43.Krames. Fitness [brochure]. Yardley, PA: Krames; 2001.Google Scholar
- 44.Werch C. Fitness and health survey [survey]: Phase II trial. Jacksonville, FL: University of Florida, Addictive and Health Behaviors Research Institute; 2006.Google Scholar
- 45.SurveyMonkey.com. Available at www.surveymonkey.com. Accessibility verified June 2, 2008.
- 48.Ellickson P, Hays R. Beliefs about resistance self-efficacy and drug prevalence: Do they really affect drug use? Int J Addict. 1991; 2511A: 1353–1378.Google Scholar
- 50.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. State and local youth risk behavior. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/HealthyYouth/YRBS/pdfs/2005highschoolquestionaire.pdf. Accessibility verified June 2, 2008.
- 51.Gruenwald P, Johnson F, Treno A. Outlets, drinking and driving: A multilevel analysis of availability. J Stud Alcohol. 2002; 634: 460–468.Google Scholar
- 53.U.S Departments of Health and Human Services, and Agriculture. Dietary guidelines for Americans 2005. Available at: http://www.healthierus.gov/dietaryguidelines/. Accessibility verified June 2, 2008.
- 59.SPSS, Inc. SPSS 13.0 for Windows. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc.; 2004.Google Scholar
- 61.Marcus B, Williams D, Dubbert P, et al. A scientific statement from the American Heart Association Council on Nutrition, Physical Activity, and Metabolism (Subcommitte on Physical Activity); Council on Cardiovascular Disease in the Young; and the Interdisciplinary Working Group on Quality of Care and Outcomes Research. Circulation. 2006; 114: 2739–2752.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar