Why Students Drink: Testing a Conceptual Model of How Social Anxiety and Drinking Motives Influence Drinking
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Socially anxious students may be at risk for heavy drinking and alcohol-related problems (e.g., injuries), because they may endorse more maladaptive drinking motives, such as drinking to cope with their anxiety or to conform to peer-pressure (Hingson et al., 2005).This study assessed two conceptual models: 1) whether social anxiety predicts drinking motives, which in turn predict alcohol-outcomes (i.e., a mediation model), and 2) whether social anxiety exacerbates the effect of drinking motives on alcohol-outcomes (i.e., moderation model).Undergraduates (N = 387) completed an online survey, and of these n = 76 completed a follow-up brief survey study.Both surveys assessed social anxiety, drinking motives, and alcohol-outcomes.Results showed that coping and conformity motives explained the associations between social anxiety and alcohol-related problems, and coping motives explained the association between social anxiety and heavy drinking.Drinking motives should be targeted to reduce alcohol-use on campuses, especially for socially anxious students.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".