Do Individual and Situational Factors Explain the Link Between Predrinking and Heavier Alcohol Consumption? An Event-Level Study of Types of Beverage Consumed and Social 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
AIM: Predrinking (drinking in private settings before going to licensed premises) has been shown to be positively associated with amount of alcohol consumed. The present study assesses whether this association is explained by general drinking patterns or situational factors, including drinking duration, beverage type and drinking companions. METHODS: In a sample of 183 young adults from French-speaking Switzerland, data on alcohol consumption, whereabouts and drinking companions were collected using questionnaires sent to participants' cell phones at five time points from 5 p.m. to midnight every Thursday, Friday and Saturday over five consecutive weeks. Means and proportion tests and multilevel models were conducted based on 6650 assessments recorded on 1441 evenings. RESULTS: Over the study period, predrinkers drank more frequently than did non-predrinkers and, among males, predrinkers drank more heavily. Predrinking was related to increased drinking duration and thus total consumption in the evenings. Larger groups of people were reported for predrinking compared with off-premise only drinking situations. Among women, the consumption of straight spirits (i.e. not mixed with soft drinks) while predrinking was associated with higher total evening alcohol consumption. Among men, drinking with exclusively male friends or female friends while predrinking was associated with higher consumption. CONCLUSION: Heavier drinking on predrinking evenings mainly results from longer drinking duration, with individual and situational factors playing a smaller role. Prevention efforts on reducing the time that young adults spend drinking and harm reduction measures such as restriction of access to on-premise establishments once intoxicated are recommended.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it