Personalized Booster Feedback After Alcohol Health Education

Heavy episodic alcohol use within the college student population is widespread, creating problems for student drinkers, their peers, and their institutions. Negative consequences from frequent or heavy alcohol use can be mild (e.g., hangovers, missed classes), moderate (e.g., poor grades, damaged relationships), or severe (e.g., assault, even death). Given the potentially dangerous consequences, reducing alcohol use and associated problems is a major health priority. Although online interventions targeting college student drinking reduce alcohol consumption and associated problems, they are not as effective as in-person interventions. The benefits of online interventions include cost-effectiveness and ease of administration, plus they offer privacy, reduce stigma, and may reach individuals who would otherwise not receive treatment.

Although post-intervention boosters have been shown to be effective for individuals seeking treatment for alcohol-related injuries in emergency medical settings, limited studies have investigated the efficacy of boosters for college students who have received alcohol interventions. In a recently completed randomized, controlled trial, an emailed booster with personalized feedback improved the efficacy of a popular online intervention, while at the same time maintaining low cost and easy dissemination (Braitman & Henson, 2016). Although promising, the booster incorporated in the study needs further empirical refinement.

The current project seeks to build on past progress reducing the gap between online and more efficacious in-person interventions. The current study further develops and refines the booster to identify optimal administration for maximum efficacy. In particular, one aspect missing from online interventions is a connection with a person invested in improving the student's outcomes. The current study aims to generate a personal connection for online interventions through a follow-up booster emailed by a member of the research staff. Outcomes will be compared for participants who receive a follow-up booster with similar content, but is clearly automatically generated and not from any particular individual.

There are 3 conditions: all participants receive the initial online intervention targeting college drinking. Condition 1 (the control group) receives an email with a reminder to complete the follow-up surveys, but no feedback (i.e., no booster). Condition 2 receives an emailed booster with normative feedback plus protective strategies feedback, clearly automatically generated. Condition 3 receives an emailed booster with normative feedback plus protective strategies feedback, from a member of the research staff. The booster content alone (automatically generated) may be efficacious, or the additional personal connection may enhance the effect.

Thus, the aim of the current study is to examine if personal contact enhances the tailored feedback received via booster email.