ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT05608109SMASHUpdated Feb 3, 2025

A Social Media Personalized Normative Feedback Intervention for Heavy Drinking College Students

An interventional study of Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF) and Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF) in Alcohol Consumption, sponsored by Duquesne University. Completed at 3 sites in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 26 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-02-03.

Sponsored by Duquesne University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 9 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Jan 2022, registered Oct 2022).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
401
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 26 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study seeks to evaluate the unique and synergistic efficacy of social media-specific personalized normative feedback targeting the reduction of alcohol use among heavy-drinking college students who post alcohol-related content on social media.

Hypothesis: Alcohol personalized normative feedback, social media-specific personalized normative feedback, and the Alcohol personalized normative feedback+ social media-specific personalized normative feedback conditions will be more effective in reducing drinking than the attention control condition.

02

Conditions studied

  • Alcohol Consumption

Browse trials for

Keywords

  • social media
03

In context

Alcohol Drinking

701 studies on the registry are indexed under Alcohol Drinking; 133 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 401 is above the median of 122 across 607 interventional studies indexed under Alcohol Drinking.

Browse Alcohol Drinking studies →

Lead sponsor

Duquesne University is the lead sponsor of 27 studies on the registry; 2 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 26 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • College students recruited across three universities: Duquesne University, Miami University, and University of Houston (DU, MU, UH)
  • Undergraduate college students 18 to 26 years old
  • Meet heavy drinking (4+ drinks in one sitting for individuals assigned female at birth, 5+ drinks in one sitting for individuals assigned male at birth in the past month) and ARC (alcohol-related content) posting criteria (2+ ARC posts in the last 30 days for individuals assigned female at birth, 1+ for individuals assigned male at birth, on either Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Twitter, or TikTok)

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Pregnant or of another protected population
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
401 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)

    Participants will receive feedback about their consumption, what they think the average student at their university drinks, and actual drinking statistics at their university. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.

    Behavioral: Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)

  • Experimental
    Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

    Participants will receive feedback about their consumption and alcohol related consumption posts, what they think the average student at their university drinks, and actual drinking statistics at their university. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.

    Behavioral: Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

  • Experimental
    Alcohol and social media personalized normative feedback (APNF + SMPNF)

    Participants will go through the alcohol personalized normative feedback process and the social media personalized normative feedback. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey and afterwards will receive the feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys at 3-months and 6-months.

    Behavioral: Alcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF) · Behavioral: Social media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

  • No intervention
    Attention control

    Participants will receive feedback about their consumption of desserts, what they think their peers consume, and actual dessert consumption statistics are for individuals in their age group in the United States. Participants in this condition will participate in a baseline survey/feedback intervention. They will then complete follow-up surveys and feedback interventions at 3-months and 6-months.

Interventions

  • BehavioralAlcohol personalized normative feedback (APNF)

    Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) drinking days per week, (b) average drinks per occasion, (c) drinks per week, and (d) drinking percentile rank.

  • BehavioralSocial media personalized normative feedback (SMPNF)

    Participants will receive individualized feedback based upon their survey responses. Feedback regarding participant's alcohol related content posts on social media and drinking compared to other same-university students will include: (a) alcohol related posting days per week, (b) average alcohol related posting per week, (c) posting percentile rank, (d) drinking days per week, (e) average drinks per week, and (f) drinking percentile rank.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire (B-YAACQ) - change is being assessed

    The B-YAACQ is a 24 item assessment which measures consequences in 8 domains over a given time frame. Subscales include: Social/Interpersonal, Academic/Occupational, Risky Behavior, Impaired Control, Poor Self-Care, Diminished Self-Perception, Blackout Drinking, and Physiological Dependence. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 24; Higher scores indicate more alcohol-related problems.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

  2. Alcohol Use Disorder Identification Test (AUDIT) - change is being assessed

    The AUDIT is a 10 item tool which assesses a participant's drinking habits and alcohol-related consequences. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 40; Higher scores indicate worse outcomes. A score of 15 or more indicates the likelihood of alcohol dependence.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

  3. Rutgers Alcohol Problems Index (RAPI) -change is being assessed

    The RAPI is a 25-item questionnaire that measures problem drinking. Items are rated on a 4-point Likert scale, ranging from none (0) to more than five times (4). Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 100; Higher scores indicate more alcohol-related problems.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

  4. Quantity/Frequency/Peak Index (QFI) -change is being assessed

    The QFI consists of five items which assess participants' typical alcohol consumption patterns. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 24; Higher scores indicate more alcohol use.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

  5. Daily Drinking Questionnaire (DDQ) -change is being assessed

    The DDQ is a 9 item tool which assesses participants' drinking over the past 3 months. Participants report how much they drank on an average over the past 3 months by indicating the number of drinks they consumed on each day of the week. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 175 (windsorized to 25 drinks per day); Higher scores indicate more alcohol use.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

  6. Drinking Norms Rating Form (DNRF) -change is being assessed

    The DNRF is a 5 item questionnaire that assesses an individual's view on the drinking habits of other individuals attending the same university. It was adapted from the Daily Drinking Questionnaire to assess perceptions of drinking norms on campus. Minimum value: 0; Maximum Value: 175 (windsorized to 25 drinks per day); Higher scores indicate students perceive their peers to engage in more alcohol use.

    Time frame: Baseline, 3 month follow-up, 6 month follow-up

07

Study locations

3 sites
  • Miami University
    Oxford, Ohio 45056, United States
  • University of Houston
    Houston, Pennsylvania 77204, United States
  • Duquesne University
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15282, United States
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Wallace JM Jr, Bachman JG, O'Malley PM, Schulenberg JE, Cooper SM, Johnston LD. Gender and ethnic differences in smoking, drinking and illicit drug use among American 8th, 10th and 12th grade students, 1976-2000. Addiction. 2003 Feb;98(2):225-34. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2003.00282.x. PubMed 12534428 ↗
  • Rinker DV, Diamond PM, Walters ST, Wyatt TM, DeJong W. Distinct Classes of Negative Alcohol-Related Consequences in a National Sample of Incoming First-Year College Students: A Latent Class Analysis. Alcohol Alcohol. 2016 Sep;51(5):602-8. doi: 10.1093/alcalc/agw036. Epub 2016 Jun 20. PubMed 27325885 ↗
  • Curtis BL, Lookatch SJ, Ramo DE, McKay JR, Feinn RS, Kranzler HR. Meta-Analysis of the Association of Alcohol-Related Social Media Use with Alcohol Consumption and Alcohol-Related Problems in Adolescents and Young Adults. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2018 Jun;42(6):978-986. doi: 10.1111/acer.13642. Epub 2018 May 22. PubMed 29786874 ↗
  • Collins RL, Parks GA, Marlatt GA. Social determinants of alcohol consumption: the effects of social interaction and model status on the self-administration of alcohol. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1985 Apr;53(2):189-200. doi: 10.1037//0022-006x.53.2.189. No abstract available. PubMed 3998247 ↗
  • Read JP, Kahler CW, Strong DR, Colder CR. Development and preliminary validation of the young adult alcohol consequences questionnaire. J Stud Alcohol. 2006 Jan;67(1):169-77. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2006.67.169. PubMed 16536141 ↗
  • Saunders JB, Aasland OG, Babor TF, de la Fuente JR, Grant M. Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): WHO Collaborative Project on Early Detection of Persons with Harmful Alcohol Consumption--II. Addiction. 1993 Jun;88(6):791-804. doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.1993.tb02093.x. PubMed 8329970 ↗
  • Martens MP, Neighbors C, Dams-O'Connor K, Lee CM, Larimer ME. The factor structure of a dichotomously scored Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2007 Jul;68(4):597-606. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2007.68.597. PubMed 17568966 ↗
  • Dimeff, L. A. (Ed.). (1999). Brief alcohol screening and intervention for college students (BASICS): A harm reduction approach. Guilford Press.
  • Lindgren KP, Neighbors C, Teachman BA, Baldwin SA, Norris J, Kaysen D, Gasser ML, Wiers RW. Implicit alcohol associations, especially drinking identity, predict drinking over time. Health Psychol. 2016 Aug;35(8):908-918. doi: 10.1037/hea0000396. PubMed 27505215 ↗
  • Cooper ML. Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: development and validation of a four-factor-model. Psychological Assessment. 1994; 6(2): 117-128.
  • Przybylski, AK, Murayama, K, DeHaan, CR, Gladwell, V. Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior. 2013; 29: 1814-1848.
  • Shensa A, Sidani JE, Escobar-Viera CG, Switzer GE, Primack BA, Choukas-Bradley S. Emotional support from social media and face-to-face relationships: Associations with depression risk among young adults. J Affect Disord. 2020 Jan 1;260:38-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2019.08.092. Epub 2019 Aug 29. PubMed 31493637 ↗
  • Cella D, Riley W, Stone A, Rothrock N, Reeve B, Yount S, Amtmann D, Bode R, Buysse D, Choi S, Cook K, Devellis R, DeWalt D, Fries JF, Gershon R, Hahn EA, Lai JS, Pilkonis P, Revicki D, Rose M, Weinfurt K, Hays R; PROMIS Cooperative Group. The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) developed and tested its first wave of adult self-reported health outcome item banks: 2005-2008. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010 Nov;63(11):1179-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.04.011. Epub 2010 Aug 4. PubMed 20685078 ↗
  • Radloff, LS. The CES-D Scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement. 1977; 1(3): 385-401.
  • Lang FR, John D, Ludtke O, Schupp J, Wagner GG. Short assessment of the Big Five: robust across survey methods except telephone interviewing. Behav Res Methods. 2011 Jun;43(2):548-67. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0066-z. PubMed 21424189 ↗
  • Hays RD, DiMatteo MR. A short-form measure of loneliness. J Pers Assess. 1987 Spring;51(1):69-81. doi: 10.1207/s15327752jpa5101_6. PubMed 3572711 ↗
  • Spitzer RL, Kroenke K, Williams JB, Lowe B. A brief measure for assessing generalized anxiety disorder: the GAD-7. Arch Intern Med. 2006 May 22;166(10):1092-7. doi: 10.1001/archinte.166.10.1092. PubMed 16717171 ↗
  • Andreassen CS, Torsheim T, Brunborg GS, Pallesen S. Development of a Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychol Rep. 2012 Apr;110(2):501-17. doi: 10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2.501-517. PubMed 22662404 ↗
  • Baer JS, Stacy A, Larimer M. Biases in the perception of drinking norms among college students. J Stud Alcohol. 1991 Nov;52(6):580-6. doi: 10.15288/jsa.1991.52.580. PubMed 1758185 ↗
  • Sobell LC, Sobell MB. 2012. Timeline Follow-Back. In: Litten R.Z., Allen J.P. (eds) Measuring Alcohol Consumption. Humana Press, Totowa, NJ. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0357-5_3
  • Zimmerman GL, Olsen CG, Bosworth MF. A 'stages of change' approach to helping patients change behavior. Am Fam Physician. 2000 Mar 1;61(5):1409-16. PubMed 10735346 ↗
  • Neighbors C, Dillard AJ, Lewis MA, Bergstrom RL, Neil TA. Normative misperceptions and temporal precedence of perceived norms and drinking. J Stud Alcohol. 2006 Mar;67(2):290-9. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2006.67.290. PubMed 16562412 ↗
  • Kahler CW, Hustad J, Barnett NP, Strong DR, Borsari B. Validation of the 30-day version of the Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire for use in longitudinal studies. J Stud Alcohol Drugs. 2008 Jul;69(4):611-5. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2008.69.611. PubMed 18612578 ↗
  • Moussas G, Dadouti G, Douzenis A, Poulis E, Tzelembis A, Bratis D, Christodoulou C, Lykouras L. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT): reliability and validity of the Greek version. Ann Gen Psychiatry. 2009 May 14;8:11. doi: 10.1186/1744-859X-8-11. PubMed 19442281 ↗
  • Earleywine M, LaBrie JW, Pedersen ER. A brief Rutgers Alcohol Problem Index with less potential for bias. Addict Behav. 2008 Sep;33(9):1249-53. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.05.006. Epub 2008 May 13. PubMed 18547738 ↗
  • Webb GR, Redman S, Gibberd RW, Sanson-Fisher RW. The reliability and stability of a quantity-frequency method and a diary method of measuring alcohol consumption. Drug Alcohol Depend. 1991 May;27(3):223-31. doi: 10.1016/0376-8716(91)90005-j. PubMed 1884665 ↗
  • Mange J, Mauduy M, Senemeaud C, Bagneux V, Cabe N, Jacquet D, Leconte P, Margas N, Mauny N, Ritz L, Gierski F, Beaunieux H. What really matters in binge drinking: A dominance analysis of binge drinking psychological determinants among University students. Addict Behav Rep. 2021 Apr 8;13:100346. doi: 10.1016/j.abrep.2021.100346. eCollection 2021 Jun. PubMed 33997251 ↗
  • Arterberry BJ, Martens MP, Cadigan JM, Smith AE. Assessing the Dependability of Drinking Motives via Generalizability Theory. Addict Res Theory. 2012 Oct 1;45(4):292-302. doi: 10.1177/0748175612449744. PubMed 24696672 ↗
  • Osberg TM, Atkins L, Buchholz L, Shirshova V, Swiantek A, Whitley J, Hartman S, Oquendo N. Development and validation of the College Life Alcohol Salience Scale: a measure of beliefs about the role of alcohol in college life. Psychol Addict Behav. 2010 Mar;24(1):1-12. doi: 10.1037/a0018197. PubMed 20307107 ↗
  • Xu S, Qiu D, Hahne J, Zhao M, Hu M. Psychometric properties of the short-form UCLA Loneliness Scale (ULS-8) among Chinese adolescents. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018 Sep;97(38):e12373. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000012373. PubMed 30235699 ↗
  • Zhong QY, Gelaye B, Zaslavsky AM, Fann JR, Rondon MB, Sanchez SE, Williams MA. Diagnostic Validity of the Generalized Anxiety Disorder - 7 (GAD-7) among Pregnant Women. PLoS One. 2015 Apr 27;10(4):e0125096. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0125096. eCollection 2015. PubMed 25915929 ↗
  • Carey KB, Carey MP, Maisto SA, Henson JM. Temporal stability of the timeline followback interview for alcohol and drug use with psychiatric outpatients. J Stud Alcohol. 2004 Nov;65(6):774-81. doi: 10.15288/jsa.2004.65.774. PubMed 15700516 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Feb 3, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05608109
Lead sponsor
Duquesne University
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Nov 8, 2022
Start date
Jan 9, 2022
Primary completion
Jul 30, 2024
Completion
Dec 28, 2024
Last update
Feb 3, 2025

Study contacts

Mai-Ly N Steers, PhD
principal investigator · Duquesne University

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Nov 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion