Investigatingalcohol-specificfeedbackfromsocialnetworkmembersmaybeparticularlyusefulforunderstandingsocialinfluencesonalcoholuseamongcommunity-dwellingemergingadults(EAs)andguidedevelopmentofpreventativeinterventions.Torecruitthistargetgroup,weimplementedDigitalRespondentDrivenSampling(D-RDS),apeer-drivenchainreferralmethodthataccessessocialnetworks,adominantinfluenceonEAdrinking.

Thepresentstudyexaminedalcohol-relatedfeedbackfromsocialnetworkmembersamongcommunity-basedEAsanditsrelationtotheirdrinkingpatternsandconsequences.Basedonpriorfindings,drinkingpatternsandconsequencesamongEAswereexpectedtobeinfluenceddifferentiallybyfeedbacktype(e.g.,encouragement,discouragement)andsource(e.g.,friends,family,spouse).

Social Network Feedback and Drinking Outcomes in Community-Dwelling Emerging Adults Recruited by Peer Referral

Katie N. Lindstrom, JeeWon Cheong, Susan D. Chandler, Joseph P. Bacon, & Jalie A. Tucker

INTRODUCTION RESULTS

DISCUSSION

METHOD

ResultssupportedthefeasibilityofD-RDStorecruitcommunity-dwellingEAs,whichhaspotentialforreachandscalability.

Ashypothesized,drinkingfeedbackfromclosesocialnetworkmemberswasassociatedwithdrinkingpracticesandconsequencesamongcommunity-basedEAs.Whiledrinkingtypicallyoccursmostlywithfriendsduringthisdevelopmentalstage,friendsmayactasprotectiveinfluencersiftheydiscouragedrinking.Incontrast,familydiscouragementofdrinkingwasassociatedwithmoredrinksperdrinkingdayandappearstobecounterproductive.

Thisresearchsupportstargetingsocialnetworksininterventions,especiallynetworkmemberswhodrinktogether.Itsuggeststheimportanceofconsistentmessagesregardingdrinkinganddevelopinginterventionstomodifydrinkingbehaviorsandnormsamongclosenetworkmembers,whilepromotingengagementwithdifferentnetworkswithmoreprotectiveinfluencers.

ReferencesGile,K.J.,Johnston,L.G.,&Salganik,M.J.(2015).DiagnosticsforRespondent-drivenSampling.Journalof

theRoyalStatisticalSociety.SeriesA,(StatisticsinSociety),178(1),241–269.Kahler,C.W.,Strong,D.R.,&Read,J.P.(2005).Towardefficientandcomprehensivemeasurementofthe

alcoholproblemscontinuumincollegestudents:TheBriefYoungAdultAlcoholConsequencesQuestionnaire.Alcoholism:ClinicalandExperimentalResearch,29(7),1180-1189.

Tucker,J.A.,Cheong,J.,Chandler,S.D.,Crawford,M.S.,&Simpson,C.A.(2015).Socialnetworksandsubstanceuseamongat-riskemergingadultslivingindisadvantagedurbanareasinthesouthernUnitedStates:Across-sectionalnaturalisticstudy.Addiction,110(9),1524-1532.

UF Department of Health Education & Behavior and Center for Behavioral Economic Health Research

METHOD

Sample:“Seeds”(ages21-29)wererecruitedinpersonatcommunity

venues(e.g.,sport/musicevents,outdoormarkets)tostartD-RDSusingverifiedtargetpopulationmembers.Subsequentrecruitmentandassessmentofpeers“likethemselves”wereconductedonline.D-RDSenrolleda desiredsampleof357riskyEAdrinkerslivinginthecommunity(medianage=23.6years;64%female;medianincome<$20K/year;86.7%educatedbeyondhighschool;<10%marriedorhavechildren).SeedswereexcludedfromanalysesfollowingstandardRDSanalysisprocedures(Gile etal.,2015).SocialNetworkAssessment:• Norbeck SocialSupportScale (Tuckeretal.,2015).Participants

listedupto10networkmembersbyrelationshipandageandratedtheextenttowhicheachencouraged,discouraged,orgavemixeddrinkingfeedback(1=“notatall”to5=“agreatdeal”).Alcohol-relatedfeedbackwascalculatedfordifferentsources,i.e.,friends,spouse/partner,andotherfamilymembers/relatives.

Outcomes:• Numberofdrinksperdrinkingdayduringlastmonth.• Numberofdrinkingdaysduringlastmonth.• Negativedrinkingconsequencesduringpast3months(Brief

YoungAdultAlcoholConsequencesQuestionnaire,Kahler etal.,2005). *p<.05;**p<.01;***p<.001

SocialNetworkSubgroup

NorbeckFeedback onAlcoholType

DrinksPerDrinkingDay

DrinkingDaysPastMonth

NegativeConsequences

B(SE) B(SE) B(SE)

Friends Encouragement .037 (.037) .007(.031) .059(.034)

Discouragement .009(.040) -.110 (.034)** -.081 (.038)*

Ambivalence .037 (.043) .119 (.036)*** .098 (.039)*

Family/Relatives

Encouragement -.040 (.045) -.068 (.036) .031(.037)

Discouragement .159(.047)*** -.024(.042) .013(.042)

Ambivalence -.068 (.056) -.004(.047) .033(.047)

Spouse/Partner Encouragement -.030 (.050) -.013(.039) .014(.044)

Discouragement .034(.044) -.039(.036) .077(.041)

Ambivalence -.001(.055) .048(.043) .113(.049)*

DataAnalysis:Weightednegativebinomialregressionanalyseswere

conductedusingSASEGv8.1topredictdrinkingpracticesandconsequenceswithsocialnetworkfeedbackmeasures.SeveralcovariatesassociatedwithhealthriskbehaviorsinRDSstudieswereincludedtocontrolforpotentialconfounding(e.g.,age,gender,race,educationlevel,andyearlyincome).

Separatemodelswereexaminedforthe3differentdrinkingoutcomesand3socialnetworksources.Table1presentstheassociationsbetweensocialnetworkfeedbackanddrinkingpracticesandconsequences.

Overall,socialnetworkfeedbackaboutparticipants’drinkinghadutilityinpredictingdrinkingpracticesandconsequences.

• Friends:Discouragingfeedbackwasassociatedwithfewerpastmonthdrinkingdaysandfewernegativeconsequences.Ambivalentfeedback(sometimesencouraging,sometimesdiscouragingdrinking)fromfriendswasassociatedwithmoredrinkingdaysandmorenegativeconsequences.

• Spouse/Partner: Ambivalentfeedbackwasassociatedwithmorenegativeconsequencesinthepast3months.

• Family/Otherrelatives:Associationswereoppositetothoseforfriendsandspouse/partner;i.e.,discouragementwasassociatedwithmoredrinksperdrinkingday.

Noneofthecovariateswasaconsistentpredictoracrossthedifferentmodels,althoughthedirectionofassociationswasgenerallyconsistentwithpriorstudies.

Table1.SocialNetworkPredictorsofDrinkingPracticesandConsequences

NOTE:resultsforcovariatesomittedforsimplicity