Is It More Feeling or Thinking? The Influence of Affective and Cognitive Attitude on Adolescents’ Intention to Engage in Binge Drinking
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
Previous work has revealed that interventions aiming to reduce adolescent binge drinking commonly focus on cognitive attitudes, but are insufficiently effective in changing binge-drinking intentions. The focus on these cognitive attitudes might be the reason for this insufficient success. That is, other work has revealed that affective attitudes have a stronger influence on binge-drinking intention than cognitive attitudes. However, this relation has so far only been found among traditional college students and pre-vocational school students, therewith neglecting another important population at risk, namely vocational community college students. This study examines whether affective attitudes are also significantly stronger influencers of binge-drinking intentions among vocational community college students. Using a sample of 298 vocational community college students (Mage = 17.63), the current study shows that affective attitudes were more strongly related to vocational community college students’ intention to engage in binge drinking than cognitive attitudes. This finding indicates that the effectiveness of interventions targeting adolescent binge drinking can be improved by incorporating content elements concerning affective attitudes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 it