MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407626554 · doi:10.1016/j.crbeha.2025.100172

Mental health, substance use, and stigmatization: A comparison of Canadian university students who abstain from or consume alcohol

2025· article· en· W4407626554 on OpenAlexaffabout
Tanisse Epp, Gord Garner, Robyn J. McQuaid, Sara Atif, Kim Hellemans

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrent Research in Behavioral Sciences · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSubstance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaRoyal Ottawa Mental Health CentreBC Mental Health & Substance Use ServicesCanadian Centre on Substance Use and AddictionCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubstance useMental healthPsychologyPsychiatryStigma (botany)Environmental healthGerontologyCriminologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Those who abstain from alcohol report higher loneliness but lower cannabis use • Fear of negative consequences is linked to higher self-stigma in those who abstain • Men report higher self-stigma awareness and application compared to women • Alcohol consumption correlates with negative attitudes toward those who abstain • Indifference is the primary motive for alcohol abstinence among undergraduates While alcohol consumption among young adults in Canadian post-secondary settings has been widely studied, the experiences of students who abstain from alcohol remain significantly overlooked. This study addresses this critical gap by examining how alcohol abstinence relates to mental health symptoms, substance use patterns, and loneliness among Canadian undergraduates. These findings contribute to a deeper understanding of stigma dynamics on university campuses and inform strategies to foster more inclusive, supportive environments for students who do not drink alcohol. A cross-sectional online survey was conducted among Canadian undergraduate students between November 2020 and May 2021. Demographic, mental health, and substance use differences between students who were alcohol-abstinent and non-abstinent were analyzed with chi-squared and t -tests. Pearson correlations examined the links between motivations for abstaining and self-stigma and between alcohol use and attitudes toward those who abstain. Additional t -tests assessed gender differences in motivations for abstinence, self-stigma, and attitudes toward those who are alcohol abstinent. Of the 180 participants, 48.9% were alcohol abstinent. Indifference was the primary motive for abstinence ( M = 2.7, SD = 1.2). Students who were alcohol abstinent reported significantly lower cannabis use ( p < 0.001) but higher levels of loneliness ( p = .02) compared to those who were not abstinent. Fear of negative consequences and dispositional risk were significantly associated with higher levels of self-stigma ( p's < 0.05). Men demonstrated significantly higher levels of awareness and self-application of negative stereotypes related to alcohol use compared to women ( p ’s < 0.05), reflecting a greater internalization of public stigma. Additionally, alcohol use was positively correlated with negative attitudes toward those who are alcohol abstinent ( p < .005). This study reveals the social and psychological challenges faced by students who abstain from alcohol, particularly the heightened levels of loneliness compared to their peers who drink. By identifying the factors contributing to self-stigmatization and social exclusion, our research fills a critical gap in understanding how abstinence is perceived in environments where alcohol consumption is the norm, such as university campuses. These findings are essential for informing targeted destigmatization efforts and shaping public health campaigns that challenge negative stereotypes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.461
Threshold uncertainty score0.924

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.413
GPT teacher head0.529
Teacher spread0.115 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCurrent Research in Behavioral SciencesSame topicSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesFrench-language works237,207