Personality differences between alcohol and alcohol-energy drink users: an Australian survey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose: Several surveys have investigated the consequences of co-consumption of alcohol and energy drink (ALC/ED). These have often focused on negative drinking outcomes and alcohol consumption and often conclude that alcohol and energy drink co-consumption is associated with increased involvement in risk-taking behaviours. However, they typically have not examined other group differences which might predispose certain individuals to co-consume energy drink with alcohol. Nor have they explored the reasons underpinning the relationship between risk taking and alcohol and energy drink co-consumption.\nMethod: An online survey focusing on energy drink and alcohol consumption was advertised via word-of mouth, newspapers and social media. The survey consisted of two parts. Part 1 determined participants’ preference of drink type(s) (i.e. alcohol mixed with energy drink or another mixer, or alcohol alone) along with consumption patterns. Part 2 of the survey established scores across a range of personality traits.\nResults: A total of 1650 people completed the survey, 442 who consumed alcohol mixed with energy drink. Data were analysed by on one-way ANOVA comparing scores for those who did mix alcohol with energy drinks with those who did not. Those who did mix were significantly more likely to use illicit drugs within the past year (F (1,660) = 17.90, p < 0.001), to first consume alcohol at a younger age (F (1,660) = 5.08, p = 0.025) to drink more standard drinks per drinking occasion ( F (1,660) = 37.85, p < 0.001) and to drink on more occasions within the last 30 days (F (1,660) = 16.09, p < 0.001). Furthermore, compared with ALC alone, ALC/ED consumers had significantly higher alexithymia scores (trouble with identifying and describing emotions with a tendency to focus attention externally) compared with non-consumers (F (1,407) = 5.97, p = 0.016) as measured by the Toronto Alexithymia Scale. No group differences were found on depression, anxiety or stress. scores.\nConclusion: These results indicate the presence of personality differences in alcohol and energy users compared to non-users. This finding emphasises the need for within group designs when comparing the consequences of co-consuming energy drink with alcohol and opens the possibility of using alcohol and energy drink use as a screening tool for potential behavioural problems.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".