CClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT06945471Updated Apr 25, 2025

Computer-Mediated Versus Face-to-Face Motivational-Type Interviews

An interventional study of 1) Face-to-face, and 2) Computer-mediated motivational type interviews in Marijuana Use, sponsored by University of Texas, El Paso. Completed at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 29 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-04-25.

Sponsored by University of Texas, El Paso · Not applicable, Interventional, and Other

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 11 years 1 month after the study started (first participant enrolled Mar 2014, registered Apr 2025).
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
150
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 29 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This study looks at whether in-person and computer-based motivational type interviews lead to the same kind of language and behavior change in young adults when they talk about their marijuana use. Researchers compared how much participants talked about wanting to change their level of marijuana use (change talk) or maintain their level of marijuana use (sustain talk) during each type of interview. Researchers investigated if change talk and sustain talk predicted who continued to use or not use marijuana. All participants completed:

  • A survey assessing their frequency of marijuana use.
  • A brief motivational type interview, either a face-to-face-motivational type interview or computer-mediated motivational type interview.
  • A two-month follow-up survey, again assessing their level of marijuana use.
Read the detailed description

This study investigated if face-to-face motivational-type interviews (FTF-MTIs) and computer-mediated MTIs elicit the same amount of "change talk" and behavior change when young adults discuss their ambivalence about using marijuana. 150 young adults participated in the study: 50 frequent marijuana users, 50 occasional marijuana users, and 50 non-marijuana users. All participants reported being at least moderately ambivalent about their current level of marijuana use. Participants were randomly assigned to complete a brief MTI using either the standard face-to-face format or a computer-mediated format. Amrhein's manual for assessing the presence of "change talk" and "sustain talk" was used to code the language produced by respondents in each interview format. Participants' level of marijuana use was assessed at a 2-month follow-up. We hypothesized the following:

  • FTF MTIs would elicit more words than computer-mediated MTIs
  • FTF MTIs would take less time to complete than compute-mediated MTIs.
  • Participants who used language denoting a strong commitment to reduce their marijuana use would report significantly less marijuana use at the 2-month follow-up compared with participants whose MI-type interviews contained weaker commitment language, regardless of interview format (FTF or computer-mediated).
  • FTF MTIs and computer-mediated MTIs would elicit the same amount of sustain talk and change talk (e.g., desire, ability, reasons, need, commitment, and readiness statements). The latter hypothesis was exploratory because no previous research has compared these two formats for conducting MTIs.
02

Conditions studied

  • Marijuana Use

Keywords

  • Motivational interviews; computer-mediated; commitment language; change talk; marijuana use; randomized study; young adults
03

In context

Marijuana Abuse

517 studies on the registry are indexed under Marijuana Abuse; 114 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 150 is above the median of 60 across 421 interventional studies indexed under Marijuana Abuse.

Browse Marijuana Abuse studies →

Lead sponsor

University of Texas, El Paso is the lead sponsor of 20 studies on the registry; 11 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 29 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
Yes

Inclusion criteria

  • A brief eligibility questionnaire assessed each respondent's age, previous marijuana use, and ambivalence about their marijuana use during the year preceding the study. Sample ambivalence items included: "During the past year I've had mixed emotions about my level of marijuana use or nonuse," and "How much have you thought about changing your marijuana use or nonuse during the past year?" Responses options ranged from 0 ("not at all") to 5 ("medium amount") to 10 ("a lot"). Respondents who were 18-29 years of age and reported at least a "medium amount" of ambivalence in response to 2 or more ambivalence questions were eligible to participate in the study. Three types of adults were recruited: non-marijuana users, occasional marijuana users, and frequent marijuana users. Non-marijuana users were defined as individuals who reported no history of marijuana use in their lifetime. Occasional marijuana users were defined as individuals who used marijuana 1-5 times during the 2 months preceding the study but fewer than 24 times during the year preceding the study. Frequent marijuana users were defined as individuals who used marijuana more than 7 times during the 2 months preceding the study and more than 24 times during the year preceding the study.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • We excluded participants who did not meet the above criteria.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Other
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
150 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Face-to-face motivational type (FTF MTIs) interviews

    The interviews conducted in this study were guided by 4 of the 5 major principles of MI. Specifically, the interviews (1) were nonjudgmental, (2) were empathic, (3) respected participants' autonomy, and (4) helped participants explore their ambivalence toward behavior change. However, unlike standard motivational interviews, the interviews in this study did not subtly guide participants toward reducing marijuana use. The interviews were not intended as a clinical intervention. The decision to omit the direction-oriented component of MI was guided by a single consideration: the national trend toward the legalization of recreational marijuana use. FTF MTIs were guided by a 4-page script that incorporated the main principles of MI, including reflective listening, expression of empathy, and a nonjudgmental conversational style. The script included an equal number of open-ended questions exploring the benefits and costs of using marijuana. FTF MTIs were conducted in a research office.

    Behavioral: 1) Face-to-face, and 2) Computer-mediated motivational type interviews

  • Experimental
    Computer-mediated motivational type interviews (CM-MTIs)

    Computer-mediated interviews were conducted using the identical 4-page script that guided the FTF MTIs. Computer-mediated MTIs were completed via computer, with the interviewer and participant located in adjacent rooms within the same research suite used for the FTF MTIs. However, the interviewer and interviewee never met in person. Upon arrival, a research assistant greeted participants, administered Time 1 assessments, and provided instructions for using the computer's instant messaging software to communicate during the motivational-type interview. LAN Instant Messenger software (version 1.2.35, Qualia Digital Solutions) was used to conduct computer-mediated interviews and computer-mediated MTIs were saved as text files.

    Behavioral: 1) Face-to-face, and 2) Computer-mediated motivational type interviews

Interventions

  • Behavioral1) Face-to-face, and 2) Computer-mediated motivational type interviews
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Frequency of marijuana use at two-month follow-up

    During the past two months, how many times (if any) have you smoked or consumed marijuana?

    Time frame: 2-month-follow-up

07

Study locations

1 site
  • University of Texas at El Paso
    El Paso, Texas 79968, United States
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Undecided — The datasets generated or analyzed during this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. No individual raw data will be released that would compromise the anonymity or confidentiality of the participants.

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

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

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT06945471
Lead sponsor
University of Texas, El Paso
Collaborators
National Institute on Drug Abuse (NIDA)
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Apr 25, 2025
Start date
Mar 2014
Primary completion
Dec 15, 2015
Completion
Sep 6, 2019
Last update
Apr 25, 2025

Study contacts

Lawrence D. Cohn, PhD
principal investigator · University of Texas, El Paso
Jon Amastae, PhD
principal investigator · University of Texas, El Paso

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 Apr 2025. 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