Alcohol consumption among young consumers: a review and recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to examine social marketing programs aimed at preventing or moderating alcohol consumption among young consumers. It seeks to show how protection motivation theory can be used as a theoretical framework to create effective communications targeting young people. Design/methodology/approach Communication materials aimed at preventing or moderating alcohol consumption among young people were identified and gathered from web sites in five English‐speaking countries (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the UK). A qualitative review of these materials was conducted. Findings A majority of the alcohol moderation/prevention campaigns targeting young consumers followed the tenets of protection motivation theory by focusing on the threat variables of severity and vulnerability. Some campaigns also focused on costs, as well as self‐efficacy and response efficacy. Research limitations/implications Only English‐language materials and materials targeting young consumers have been considered, so findings cannot necessarily be generalized to other languages or countries. Practical implications Future youth alcohol moderation/prevention initiatives should include self‐efficacy messages, to increase confidence among young people that they are able to carry out the recommended actions. Originality/value The review presents a comprehensive examination of initiatives aimed at preventing/reducing alcohol consumption among young consumers, and shows how protection motivation theory can be successfully used in this context.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".