MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980652202 · doi:10.1037/adb0000520

Examining drinking game harms as a function of gender and college student status.

2019· article· en· W2980652202 on OpenAlexaff
Byron L. Zamboanga, Lucy E. Napper, Amanda M. George, Janine V. Olthuis

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of Addictive Behaviors · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of FrederictonUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYoung adultPsychologyFeelingAlcohol consumptionHeavy drinkingClinical psychologyDemographyGerontologyInjury preventionDevelopmental psychologySocial psychologyAlcoholEnvironmental healthPoison controlMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drinking game (DG) participation among young adults is widespread. Because heavy alcohol consumption is commonly associated with playing DGs, this activity presents a health risk for those who play. In the present study, we explored the most common negative DG consequences experienced by young adults and how DG consequences differed by gender and college status. Participants were young adult drinking gamers (N = 1,600; age 18-25; Mage = 22.6; 47% men; 41% noncollege students; 77% White) recruited from Amazon's Mechanical Turk. They completed an online anonymous survey which included items on the Brief Young Adult Alcohol Consequences Questionnaire that were modified to measure DG consequences experienced in the past month. Over half of the participants reported experiencing a hangover, saying/doing embarrassing things, having less energy, and feeling sick as a result of playing DGs. Using IRT analysis, we also found differential item functioning (DIF) on several items across gender and college status. We then created a short-form version of the DG consequences measure that excluded items demonstrating DIF, and based on this modified measure, we examined differences in severity of negative DG consequences as a function of gender and college status. Controlling for age, college status, DG frequency/consumption, and alcohol use on non-DG occasions, we found that men experienced slightly more DG consequences than women. Similar findings emerged for college students compared to noncollege students. This study is an important first step toward understanding who is most at risk for experiencing certain types of negative DG consequences and how researchers/practitioners could measure this construct. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.092
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of Addictive BehaviorsSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207