Pregaming in high school students: Relevance to risky drinking practices, alcohol cognitions, and the social drinking context.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pregaming is the practice of consuming alcohol prior to going out to a social event. Although pregaming has begun to receive research attention in the college setting, very little is known about this risky drinking behavior in high school students. As pregaming has health implications for both students who are college bound and those who are not, we examined the prevalence of this behavior in a sample of high school students who reported current alcohol use and completed pregaming measures (n = 233). The present study examined the associations of gender, age, alcohol expectancies, motivations for drinking (e.g., social, enhancement, and coping), and engagement in other risky drinking practices (i.e., general hazardous use and drinking game participation) with pregaming. Results indicate that pregaming was significantly associated with being older, being a male, having high levels of hazardous alcohol use, and participating in drinking games frequently. Pregaming also occurred most often before parties and sporting events and it was associated positively with frequency of attendance at parties where alcohol is available, the tendency to use alcohol at these parties, and the amount of alcohol consumed at these parties. We discuss the findings in the context of pregaming research that has been conducted with college students, and make suggestions regarding prevention and intervention efforts focused on this risky drinking practice.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it