Cited by 4Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesMental Health Treatment and AccessDigital Mental Health Interventions

Examining the role of a brief online alcohol use risk feedback on accessing information about available treatment resources for alcohol issues

Tuliao, Antover P., Mullet, Natira D., Hawkins, Lindsey G., Holyoak, Derek, Weerts, Marisa, Gudenrath, Travis·2019·Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

Research suggests college-aged young adults are hesitant to seek treatment for alcohol use disorder and highlights barriers contributing to a gap in treatment utilization. One barrier to treatment utilization is the lack of information about available treatment resources. Motivated by the literature on web-based screening and brief interventions (eSBIs), the current study examined whether providing a brief online feedback of one's alcohol use risk severity will make college students more likely to access information about available treatment options for alcohol-related issues. College students (N = 724) who responded to the Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (Babor, Higgins-Biddle, Saunders, & Monteiro, 2001) were randomly assigned to receive a brief online feedback on their alcohol use risk or to a no-feedback condition. Overall, only 20% of all participants opted to view available treatment services for alcohol issues. Participants in the feedback group (15%) were significantly less likely to view information for available services compared to the no-feedback group (24%). A significant feedback condition x stigma interaction effect was found, such that those with average and high stigma towards substance use scores were less likely to view treatment information when provided feedback. Without a thorough discussion of individual risks and without the safeguards against psychological reactance present in eSBIs, providing college students with brief online feedback about their alcohol use risk severity made them less likely to access information concerning available on-campus mental health resources for alcohol issues. On the other hand, improving help-seeking attitudes could help increase treatment utilization.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.05.004

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 31 · Cited by 4

Authors
Tuliao, A. P., Mullet, N. D., Hawkins, L. G., Holyoak, D., Weerts, M., & Gudenrath, T.
Affiliations
Texas Tech University (US)
Corresponding author
Tuliao, Antover P.
Venue
Addictive Behaviors
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-09
Volume
96
Pages
164-170
ISSN
0306-4603 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2944733044
Cited by
4
References
31
Citations by year
2023: 1 · 2022: 3
FWCI
0.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Digital Mental Health Interventions
Keywords
alcoholism, university students, treatment utilization, help-seeking attitudes, stigma, reactance, auditing
MeSH terms
Help-Seeking Behavior, Alcohol Drinking in College, Internet-Based Intervention, Adolescent, Alcohol Drinking, Alcoholism, Feedback, Female, Humans, Male, Students, Risk Assessment, Young Adult, Social Stigma

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review