A Longitudinal Examination of Alcohol Use and Subjective Well-Being in an Undergraduate Sample
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Notwithstanding well-established links between alcohol use and adverse alcohol-related consequences, evidence suggests that alcohol use among university students may also be associated with positive outcomes, including components of subjective well-being, which comprises life satisfaction, positive affect, and negative affect. Further, because alcohol use and consequences are separable factors, both need to be examined simultaneously to gauge the unique predictive role of alcohol use. We report findings from a longitudinal study of university students that addresses these important issues. METHOD: At the end of their first term at university (Time 1), 627 students (15% of all first-year students) completed a paper-and-pencil questionnaire in small group settings. Near the end of their third year (Time 2), 467 of the Time 1 respondents (75% follow-up rate) completed a subsequent survey on-line. The average (SD) longitudinal respondent was 18.83 (0.86) years old at Time 1, and 360 participants were female. RESULTS: In cross-sectional and longitudinal structural equation models, adverse alcohol-related consequences predicted lower subjective well-being (lower life satisfaction, less frequent positive affect, more frequent negative affect). Independent of this effect, greater alcohol use (greater quantity/frequency, more frequent intoxication, heavy episodic drinking) predicted higher subjective well-being, both concurrently and prospectively. CONCLUSIONS: Among these university students, alcohol use was uniquely associated with a more positive sense of well-being. A more comprehensive understanding of the significance of alcohol use among university students requires attending to positive and negative outcomes associated with alcohol use and examining alcohol use and consequences as related but separable factors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 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".