ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT07905430PSDCP-2Updated Oct 29, 2026

Does Attachment Anxiety Moderate the Influence of Social Rejection on Alcohol Use Among Young Adults?

An interventional study of Social Rejection Feedback and Social Acceptance in Social Rejection and Attachement Style, sponsored by University of North Carolina, Wilmington. Recruiting at 1 site in United States. Open to participants aged 21 Years to 25 Years, including healthy volunteers. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-10-29.

Sponsored by University of North Carolina, Wilmington · Not applicable, Interventional, and Basic science

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Oct 2026; still recruiting 1 month later.
Updated Oct 29, 2026Newly registeredGo to Updates ↓
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
152
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
21 Years to 25 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Research shows that heavy drinking patterns are linked to many harmful consequences including death, sexual assault, risky sexual behavior, and drug use. Given such harmful consequences, it is important to identify the risk-factors for heavy "in-the-moment" drinking. This study examines a potent, socially motivated trigger to problem drinking-namely, social rejection. In the present study, we employ a between-subjects experimental design with a sample of young adults (N=152; aged 21-25 years; 50% female) to examine how social rejection experiences are associated with drinking behavior as a function of attachment anxiety, changes in pain experience, and self-control.

Read the detailed description

Excessive alcohol use is a common but tragically destructive behavioral pattern, accounting for roughly 178,000 deaths per year in the United States in 2020 and 2021 (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2024). This staggering estimate represents a 29% increase in the number of deaths due to drinking that was observed just a few years ago (between 2016 and 2017; Esser et al., 2024). Moreover, nearly a third of these alcohol-related deaths were due to "in-the-moment" binge drinking (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2024). Clearly, more work is needed to identify the contextual and person-level risk factors that heighten one's vulnerability to drinking excessively and to develop effective interventions to ameliorate that risk. The present proposal focuses on one particular type of social risk factor-social rejection-that may be especially powerful in terms of increasing maladaptive drinking behavior, due to its capacity for enhancing pain experiences and diminishing self-regulatory restraint. Furthermore, in the present proposal, we identify a specific trait-attachment anxiety-that should serve as a significant, person-level risk factor, due to its association with threat appraisal, pain sensitivity, fear of rejection, and substance use. Thus, individual differences in attachment anxiety should amplify one's vulnerability to over-drinking after experiencing rejection. To date, we know that social rejection can cause people to drink greater amounts of alcohol compared to those who are socially accepted (Rabinovitz, 2014), particularly when that rejection comes from a close relationship partner (Laws et al., 2017). However, what remains unclear is why the link between social rejection and "in the moment" drinking exists and who among drinkers is most at risk. Our study was designed to fill this gap in the literature.

In the present study, we will recruit 152 carefully screened participants (aged 21 - 25) to participate in a double-blind between-subjects experiment to address the causal nature of the associations between social rejection and alcohol use. We will employ a two (social rejection vs. social acceptance) X two (male vs. female) double-blind between-subjects experimental design to examine the causal link between social rejection and drinking behavior and, further, whether increased pain experience and reduced self-control each mediate the effect of rejection on drinking. We do not expect significant gender differences in the pattern of mediation; however, we will include gender as a covariate factor, given inconsistent gender effects in the literature (see Bacon et al., 2015) and to maintain a balanced design. Finally, attachment anxiety will be examined as a potential, trait-level moderating factor.

Experimental Session:

  1. Informed Consent Process:

    The Experimental session will take place in a softly-lit, sound-controlled laboratory with three separate, private data collection rooms equipped with desks, chairs, and computers. Each room will be "treated" with vodka mist so that it smells like alcohol. Participants, aged 21 to 25 (established through checking driver's licenses), will enter the lab in groups of 3 (gender-matched). The session will begin with a research assistant (RA1; gender-matched) making introductions and starting the informed consent process. Participants will be told they will participate in a series of experiments in the UNCW Psychology Department and that "some of this research will require the tasting of alcoholic beverages," so participants must be willing and able to drink alcohol in a laboratory setting. During the informed consent process, participants will confirm that they know that they may stop the experimental procedure at any time, but, because they will consume alcohol, they must remain in the lab until their BAC level is zero. RA1 will then breath-test participants to confirm that their BAC is zero. Participants will then be asked if they complied with the substance use, food, and beverage intake requirements. Failure to comply, or a BAC above zero, will require rescheduling the appointment. Participants will then self-administer a pregnancy test (females only) and a urine drug test to confirm that they are not pregnant or currently using psychoactive drugs that might interfere with or mask alcohol effects. Participants will be told that the results of the tests will be confidential and only used to determine eligibility, after which the tests will be discarded. If an indicator is "positive", potential participants will be told that "the screening result indicates you may be ineligible today; we can discuss next steps privately".

  2. Screening:

    For participants that meet the qualifications, they will be asked to sign a consent form and provide their full name, date of birth, sex at birth, and city/municipality of birth for the generation of an anonymous, Global Unique Identifier compliant with NIAAA's requirements. This information will be collected and stored separately from all other participant data and will be destroyed at the end of the study.

    Participants will then be asked to complete a Screening Package containing the following instruments:

    Paper Questionnaires:

    1. Alcohol Use \& Drug Problems:

      • Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT: Saunders et al., 1993)
      • Timeline Follow Back (TLFB: Sobell \& Sobell, 2000) / Daily Drinking Questionnaire (DDQ: Collins et al., 1985)
      • Drug Abuse Screening Test (DAST: Skinner, 19820
      • 90-day checklist of psychoactive substance use (Noel et al., 2015)
    2. Physical health:

      - CDC Adult Health History (CDC, 2011)

    3. Psychological health:

      - Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI: Derogatis \& Melisaratos, 1983)

      Electronic Questionnaires:

    4. Demographics (gender, marital status, race, ethnicity, education, height, \& weight)
    5. Trait moderators:

      • Attachment = Experiences in Close Relationships -Short Form (ECR-S: Wei et al., 2007)
      • Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire - Revised (AEQ - Rohsenow, 1983)
      • Borderline Personality Symptoms = Personality Assessment Inventory - Borderline Scale (PAI-BOR: Morey, 1991)
      • Chronic Ostracism = Ostracism Experiences Scale (Carter-Sowell, 2010)
      • Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ: Bernstein \& Fink, 1998)
  3. Procedure:

After completing the initial consent and screening process for the experimental session, participants will be told that they are going to participate in a series of "decision-making" tasks (including the "get-to-know-you" paradigm, the Cued Go-No Go task, and taste-testing).

First, participants will take part in the "get-to-know-you paradigm" (a well-validated manipulation of rejection that reliably elicits strong feelings of social exclusion; Leary et al., 1995). Participants will be told that they will have the opportunity to get to know each other and then make a decision to work on the remaining study tasks individually or in a group. First, they will complete an essay about "what it means to be me?" and rate themselves on two bogus questionnaires with personality descriptors (e.g., "out-going", "shy"). However, they will be asked not to provide any identifying information within their essays. Participants will be informed that their essays and questionnaire responses will be distributed to each of the other two participants and that they will also read the materials from the other participants. After receiving and reading the distributed materials, participants will be asked to choose one individual with whom they would like to form a group for the next portion of the experiment. This will be done via the use of another questionnaire on which they will note the individual they would prefer to partner with for the next task based solely on their reading of the materials from the other participants.

Participants will then be randomly assigned to one of two conditions: social rejection or social acceptance.

For those assigned to the social acceptance condition, they will receive the following feedback:

"Unfortunately, as I was organizing the group materials, I noticed that we have run too many group conditions for the day. So even though everyone chose to work with you for the next portion, we won't be forming a group, and everyone will instead be working on their own."

Those assigned to the social rejection condition will receive the following feedback:

"Unfortunately, no one chose to work with you on the next task, so you will be engaging in the next task alone."

Following the rejection manipulation, participants will complete a manipulation check, a measure of state pain, and a measure of state affect (i.e., the Need Threat Scale, items from McGill Pain Questionnaire, \& PANAS) and then perform a version of the Cued Go-No Go task (Fillmore, 2003; our measure of self-regulation).

Next, alcohol consumption will be assessed through a taste-task procedure with a second, gender-matched "experimenter" (RA2; Noel et al., 2009). RA2, who is blind to the participant's experimental condition, will give the participant four chilled beverages in opaque plastic cups. Two will be labeled "alcoholic" and two will be labeled "no alcohol". We will give participants 150 ml total of the alcoholic beverage (divided equally into 75 ml per glass) and the same amount for the non-alcoholic beverage. The alcoholic beverage will be orange juice mixed with enough vodka to allow the participant to taste the alcohol. Based upon their height and weight, no participant will be given more alcohol than needed to reach a .03% BAC level of intoxication (i.e., our safety ceiling). We will use the Widmark Equation to determine amount of alcohol to distribute across participants [i.e., (Dose in grams/(Body weight in grams x Distribution ratio "r"))x100, where r(male)=.68 and r(female)=.55 and assuming an average constant rate of -0.016 BAC per hour.] The non-alcoholic beverage will be a lemonade mixture with no taste of vodka. Participants will have 20 minutes to rate each beverage according to a list of gustatory adjectives. RA 2 will then say that if the participant finishes his/her ratings during the 20 minutes, he or she is welcome to "finish any or all of the beverages you would like." RA 2 will then leave the room. After 20 minutes, RA 2 will return and collect the taste rating sheets and any remaining beverage. The Research Coordinator will measure the remainder of each participant's beverages (in ml) and subtract that from the original amount to calculate how much alcohol each participant consumed. All participants will then be fully debriefed and compensated for their participation.

After the debriefing, participants will be restricted from leaving until their BAC has reached zero, as measured by a breathalyzer. A snack will be provided and card games, videos, and so on will be available for entertainment.

02

Conditions studied

  • Social Rejection
  • Attachement Style

Browse trials for

03

In context

Social Isolation

77 studies on the registry are indexed under Social Isolation; 39 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 152 is above the median of 85 across 68 interventional studies indexed under Social Isolation.

Browse Social Isolation studies →

Lead sponsor

University of North Carolina, Wilmington is the lead sponsor of 2 studies on the registry; 1 is open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
21 Years to 25 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

  • Individuals must be 21-25 years of age;
  • Individuals are not pregnant;
  • Individuals have no history, or current diagnoses, of alcohol, drug, or psychiatric problems;
  • Individuals have no medical conditions, current or chronic, contraindicating alcohol use in the study;
  • Must be a regular drinker who is willing to taste a vodka-based beverage as part of the study.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Individuals who are pregnant;
  • Individuals who have any medical or psychiatric problems that contraindicate the tasting of alcohol;
  • Individuals taking any medication or other substance that may interact negatively with the effects of alcohol;
  • Individuals who have substance abuse problems, or think they might have a substance abuse problem.
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Basic science
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Triple (Participant, Investigator, Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
152 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    Social Rejection

    Behavioral: Social Rejection Feedback

  • Active comparator
    Social Acceptance

    Behavioral: Social Acceptance

Interventions

  • BehavioralSocial Rejection Feedback

    Those assigned to the social rejection condition will receive the following feedback: "Unfortunately, no one chose to work with you on the next task, so you will be engaging in the next task alone."

  • BehavioralSocial Acceptance

    For those assigned to the social acceptance condition, they will receive the following feedback: "Unfortunately, as I was organizing the group materials, I noticed that we have run too many group conditions for the day. So even though everyone chose to work with you for the next portion, we won't be forming a group, and everyone will instead be working on their own."

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Alcohol Consumption

    Participants will be given 150 ml total of the alcoholic beverage (orange juice mixed with enough vodka to allow the participant to taste the alcohol) and the same amount for the non-alcoholic beverage (lemonade mixture with no taste of vodka). Based upon their height and weight, no participant will be given more alcohol than needed to reach a .03% BAC level of intoxication (i.e., our safety ceiling). Participants will have 20 minutes to rate each beverage according to a list of gustatory adjectives. RA 2 will then say that if the participant finishes his/her ratings during the 20 minutes, he or she is welcome to "finish any or all of the beverages you would like." RA 2 will then leave the room. After 20 minutes, RA 2 will return and collect the taste rating sheets and any remaining beverage. The Research Coordinator will measure the remainder of each participant's beverages (in ml) and subtract that from the original amount to calculate how much alcohol each participant consumed.

    Time frame: 20 minutes

Secondary outcomes

  1. Inhibitory Control/Self-regulation

    Cued Go-No Go task (Fillmore, 2003)

    Time frame: approximately 20 minutes

  2. State Pain Perceptions

    McGill Pain Questionnaire (Melzack, 1975)

    Time frame: approximately 5 minutes

07

Study locations

1 of 1 sites recruiting
  • University of North Carolina Wilmington
    Wilmington, North Carolina 28403, United States
    Recruiting
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Rabinovitz, S. (2014). Drowning your sorrows? Social exclusion and anger effects on alcohol drinking. Addiction Research & Theory, 22, 363-370.
  • Leary, M. R., Tambor, E. S., Terdal, S. K., & Downs, D. L. (1995). Self-esteem as an interpersonal monitor: The sociometer hypothesis. Journal of personality and social psychology, 68, 518-530.
  • Melzack R. The McGill Pain Questionnaire: major properties and scoring methods. Pain. 1975 Sep;1(3):277-299. doi: 10.1016/0304-3959(75)90044-5. PubMed 1235985 ↗
  • Noel NE, Maisto SA, Johnson JD, Jackson LA Jr. The effects of alcohol and cue salience on young men's acceptance of sexual aggression. Addict Behav. 2009 Apr;34(4):386-94. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2008.11.016. Epub 2008 Nov 24. PubMed 19108956 ↗
  • Fillmore MT. Drug abuse as a problem of impaired control: current approaches and findings. Behav Cogn Neurosci Rev. 2003 Sep;2(3):179-97. doi: 10.1177/1534582303257007. PubMed 15006292 ↗
  • Esser MB, Sherk A, Liu Y, Naimi TS. Deaths from Excessive Alcohol Use - United States, 2016-2021. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2024 Feb 29;73(8):154-161. doi: 10.15585/mmwr.mm7308a1. PubMed 38421934 ↗
  • Laws HB, Ellerbeck NE, Rodrigues AS, Simmons JA, Ansell EB. Social Rejection and Alcohol Use in Daily Life. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2017 Apr;41(4):820-827. doi: 10.1111/acer.13347. Epub 2017 Mar 2. PubMed 28253539 ↗
  • Bacon AK, Cranford AN, Blumenthal H. Effects of ostracism and sex on alcohol consumption in a clinical laboratory setting. Psychol Addict Behav. 2015 Sep;29(3):664-72. doi: 10.1037/adb0000054. Epub 2015 Feb 2. PubMed 25642585 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: Yes — The study has been pre-registered on the Open Science Framework (OSF). Materials used in the study will be uploaded to OSF. Data will be shared through OSF and the NIAAA Data Archive by request. Data will not include any identifiers or personal information.

Supporting information: Study protocol, Statistical analysis plan, Informed consent form, Analytic code

Time frame: We anticipate making anonymized data publicly available in May 2030.

09

Timeline

1 registry update since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reachedSimilar studies: half by the dot; the band is the middle halfHalf of similar studies reached it by the dot; the band is the middle half, from a quarter to three quarters

Started Oct 2026 (actual). Primary completion is estimated for Aug 2028, 22 months after the start.

Of 54 non-industry interventional studies with no phase under Social Isolation, half reached primary completion within 27 months of starting (the median), counting those still running; a quarter within 14 and three quarters within 40. This study's planned 22 months is below that.

Counting every sponsor, half of 54 studies reached it within 27 months; a quarter within 14 and three quarters within 40.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Oct 22, 2026
First posted
Oct 29, 2026
StartActual
Oct 5, 2026
Primary completionEst.
Aug 23, 2028
CompletionEst.
Aug 23, 2028
Last update
Oct 29, 2026
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
Registered
First appeared on the registry. No changes since
Oct 29, 2026
Show all 1 update
  1. Oct 29, 2026
    First appeared on the registry

From the registry record's own update history. This site started tracking changes on Sep 25, 2026; for anything earlier, see the record history on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07905430
Lead sponsor
University of North Carolina, Wilmington
Responsible party
Richard S. Pond (Professor of Psychology, University of North Carolina, Wilmington) — Principal investigator
First posted
Oct 29, 2026
Start date
Oct 5, 2026
Primary completion
Aug 23, 2028 (estimated)
Completion
Aug 23, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 29, 2026

Study contacts

Richard S Pond, Ph.D.
Contact
pondr@uncw.edu
910-962-3372
Richard S Pond, Ph.D.
principal investigator · University of North Carolina, Wilmington

Oversight

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

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

Contact study team

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