Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Addictive Behaviors

Drinking to enhance and to cope: A daily process study of motive specicity

Kelly J. Arbeau a, Don Kuiken a, T. Cameron Wild b,
a b

Department of Psychology, University of Alberta, P217 Biological Sciences Building, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2E9 Addiction and Mental Health Research Laboratory, Centre for Health Promotion Studies, School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 7-30 University Terrace, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2T4

a r t i c l e
Keywords: Drinking motives College students Daily process studies

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
Objective: Daily process studies of internal drinking motives have not examined motive specicity, i.e., whether theoretically plausible trait and situational antecedents differ in their ability to predict the extent to which alcohol consumption on any given day is motivated by coping or enhancement. Method: University students (N = 81) completed trait measures of coping and enhancement-motivated drinking (trait CM and EM), sensation seeking, and conscientiousness, and then completed a 14-day online diary assessing daily completion of tasks, daily alcohol use, and (on days when alcohol was consumed) the extent to which drinking was motivated by coping or enhancement (daily CM and EM). Results: Hierarchical linear models revealed unique situational and trait antecedents of daily CM and EM. In the daily EM drinking model, main effects of daily positive affect (b = 0.11, p b 0.05), trait EM (b = 2.88, p b 0.01), and trait sensation seeking (b = 0.36, p b 0.01) were qualied by cross-level interactions between daily task accomplishment and trait conscientiousness (b = 0.03, p b 0.01), and daily task accomplishment and trait sensation seeking (b = 0.03, p b 0.01). In the daily CM drinking model, main effects of daily positive affect (b = 0.08, p b 0.05), daily negative affect (b = 0.13, p b 0.05), and trait CM (b = 4.40, p b 0.01), were qualied by cross-level interactions between trait CM and daily positive affect (b = 0.12, p b 0.05), trait CM and daily negative affect (b = 0.18, p b 0.01), and trait conscientiousness and daily task accomplishment (b = 0.01, p b 0.01). Conclusion: Our results replicated and extended Cooper et al.'s (1995) ndings on the differential roles of sensation seeking and negative affect in CM and EM drinking at the daily level, and call into question the view that drinking motives should be solely conceptualized as individual difference variables. Theoretical and applied implications of the ndings are discussed. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Alcohol use is an important part of student life at colleges and universities (Blane, 1979) and in the transition from adolescence to adulthood (Donovan, Jessor, & Jessor, 1983). A large body of research has described hazardous and harmful alcohol consumption in this population (Cyders, Flory, Rainer, & Smith, 2009; Hingson, Zha, & Weitzman, 2009; Knight et al., 2002; Wechsler, Lee, Nelson, & Kuo, 2002). Many studies describe quantity and frequency of drinking patterns (e.g., Jamison & Myers, 2008; O'Malley & Johnston, 2002), while other research has identied personal and/or environmental correlates of heavy drinking patterns and alcohol-related problems (e.g., Baer, 2002; Toomey & Wagenaar, 2002).

1.1. Motivational approaches to alcohol consumption Persistently high rates of heavy drinking and alcohol-related problems among college and university students have encouraged researchers to identify subgroups of drinkers who are at greater risk of experiencing harm. One important line of research emphasizes drinking motives, conceptualized as the nal common pathway to alcohol use, through which distal personal and environmental antecedents operate (Cox & Klinger, 1988). Motivational approaches to alcohol consumption emphasize the reasons drinkers give for consuming alcohol, and as such, focus on decision-making processes that lead to alcohol use (Cox & Klinger, 1988; Kuntsche, Knibbe, Gmel, & Engels, 2005). Cooper's (1994) inuential model proposes that drinking motives differ in the nature of the reinforcement sought from alcohol use (positive or negative) and in the source of desired consequences of alcohol consumption (internal or external). This conceptualization yields four drinking motives, each representing a qualitatively different form of drinking behavior: drinking to be social, drinking to conform, drinking to cope with negative affect, and drinking to

Corresponding author at: School of Public Health, University of Alberta, 7-30 University Terrace, Edmonton, AB, Canada T6G 2T4. Fax: + 1 780 492 9579. E-mail address: cam.wild@ualberta.ca (T.C. Wild). 0306-4603/$ see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2011.07.020

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183

1175

enhance experience. The present study investigated internallymotivated drinking, i.e., the two drinking motives in this model for which the desired consequences involve regulation of affective states. Enhancement-motivated (EM) drinking is an appetitive, positively reinforcing form of alcohol use emphasizing the induction of positive mood states. In contrast, coping-motivated (CM) drinking is a reactive, negatively reinforcing form of alcohol use emphasizing the regulation of negative affect. We studied EM and CM drinking because a growing literature indicates that, unlike social and conformity motives, they are associated with increased alcohol consumption and related problems. In a cross-sectional analysis, Cooper (1994) reported that EM and CM drinking were both positively associated with typical frequency and quantity of alcohol use, heavy drinking patterns, and alcohol problems. However, only CM drinking predicted alcohol problems after controlling for typical quantity and frequency of alcohol consumption. The latter nding has been replicated (Cooper, Frone, Russell, & Mudar, 1995), and a body of research supports the view that CM drinking is directly associated with alcohol-related problems (Carey & Correia, 1997; Cooper et al., 1995; Cooper, Russell, Skinner, Frone, & Mudar, 1992; McCormack, 1996; Park & Levenson, 2002; Sadava & Pak, 1993). Less research on EM drinking has been conducted, and there is mixed evidence on the relationship between EM drinking and alcohol problems (Cooper, 1994; Kassel, Jackson, & Unrod, 2000; Kuntsche et al., 2005; Littleeld, Sher, & Wood, 2010; Read, Wood, Kahler, Maddock, & Palfai, 2003). These inconsistent ndings may be understood if the relationship between EM drinking and alcohol problems is moderated by other variables, e.g., alcohol consumption and/or other trait and situational variables that contribute to the development of alcohol problems among students who typically drink to enhance experience (cf. Merrill & Read, 2010). Extant research in this area has conceptualized EM and CM drinking solely as between-subjects phenomena. As such, the studies reviewed thus far were only designed to answer between-subjects research questions (e.g., do drinkers who report higher CM consume more alcohol and exhibit more alcohol-related problems than drinkers who report lower CM?). Mohr et al. (2005), however, argued that theoretical predictions made by models of drinking motives are necessarily process oriented (e.g., people with higher CM should drink more when they feel depressed). For this reason, work in this area has increasingly used daily process designs, where within-subjects variables (e.g., daily mood) and between-subjects variables (e.g., individual differences in CM drinking) have been used jointly to predict daily measures of alcohol consumption (e.g., drinking quantity per occasion). This approach has facilitated the identication of daily events that, independently of individual differences, predict drinking behavior. For example, Park, Armeli, and Tennen (2004; see also Flynn, 2000) found that daily negative affect predicted daily drinking and that independently of this within-subject effect, problem-focused coping and average negative daily mood also predicted daily drinking. Another outcome in research designs incorporating betweensubject and within-subject variables has been identication of the moderating effects of individual differences on the relationship between daily events and drinking behavior. For example, Mohr et al. (2005) showed that between-subject differences in CM drinking moderated the relationship between daily negative events and daily drinking at home: compared to low-CM students, high-CM students drank more on days with more negative social contacts and negative moods. Daily process studies investigating the moderating effects of between-subjects variables on situational antecedents of drinking behavior have also provided increased theoretical precision. Hussong, Galloway, and Feagans (2005) reported that students scoring high on CM drinking reported reduced alcohol consumption on days in which sadness was experienced and increased alcohol use on days in which they experienced fear and shyness. Grant, Stewart, and Mohr (2009) claried these incongruous ndings by suggesting that CM can be

decomposed into coping-anxiety and coping-depression motives for alcohol use. Consistent with this more differentiated theoretical perspective, Grant et al. (2009) reported that individual differences in coping-depression, but not coping-anxiety, motives moderated the relationship between daily depressed mood and daily alcohol consumption. In contrast, initial coping-anxiety, but not copingdepression, motives moderated the relationship between daily anxious mood and daily alcohol consumption.

1.2. Motive specicity and objectives of the present study Although these process-oriented studies have increased our understanding of the roles of daily factors and individual differences in the prediction of daily alcohol consumption, we believe that it is worthwhile to reconsider the value of conceptualizing CM and EM drinking solely as an individual difference phenomenon. Our proposal is consistent with Cooper et al.'s (1995) proposal that internallymotivated drinking is a situationally activated process for most drinkers (p. 1003), rather than a reection of individual differences. This formulation implies that daily drinking episodes should vary in their psychological meaning, i.e., the extent to which alcohol consumption on any given day is motivated by coping or enhancement. Because so little research has examined this possibility (cf. Flynn, 2000), the goal of the present study was to examine motive specicity in daily drinking, i.e., whether theoretically plausible between-subjects (trait) and within-subjects (situational) antecedents of internally-motivated drinking differ in their ability to predict the extent to which alcohol consumption on any given day is motivated by coping or enhancement. The notion of motive specicity was implicit in Cooper et al.'s (1995) study, which identied different antecedents of CM and EM drinking (negative affect versus sensation seeking, respectively). However, this between-subjects nding was obtained among adolescents in cross-sectional analyses and, to our knowledge, has yet to be replicated among adults, nor in a daily process study. Thus, our rst research objective was to replicate Cooper et al.'s (1995) ndings about differential predictors of CM and EM drinking using daily process measures. Specically, we examined whether daily negative affect and trait sensation seeking would differentially predict the extent to which daily drinking episodes are motivated by coping or enhancement. We predicted that daily negative affect would be positively associated with daily CM drinking, but not with daily EM drinking (Flynn, 2000; Mohr et al., 2005; Park et al., 2004). Also, we predicted that individual differences in sensation seeking would be positively associated with daily EM drinking (Cooper et al., 1995; Magid, MacLean, & Colder, 2007) but not with daily CM drinking (Comeau, Stewart, & Loba, 2001; Read et al., 2003). Our second research objective was to explore whether trait conscientiousness and daily task accomplishment would also exhibit specicity in the prediction of daily CM or EM drinking. Neither of these variables appeared in Cooper et al.'s (1995) model of internallymotivated drinking, but we examined them on grounds that they are theoretically plausible inuences on internally-motivated daily drinking episodes. Our theoretical elaboration is derived from a growing body of research indicating that many student drinkers strategically consider when, where, and how to consume alcohol (Benton et al., 2004; Delva et al., 2004; Martens et al., 2005; Martens, Pedersen, LaBrie, Ferrier, & Cimini, 2007). This literature suggests that many students are careful about their drinking, and consume alcohol at times when the risk of negatively inuencing their other activities is minimized. This is an adaptive feature of student drinking, overlooked in much of the literature (cf. Magid et al., 2007). Students who take care of business before drinking can be characterized as having engaged in a form of harm reduction, involving the planning of alcohol consumption to avoid negative outcomes.

1176

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183

At the between-subjects level, a potentially relevant trait is conscientiousness, an individual difference variable related to conformity and socially prescribed impulse control (Hogan and Ones, 1997). Conscientiousness is a plausible inuence on daily motive specicity because, like sensation seeking, research suggests that it is differentially associated with individual differences in EM and CM drinking (Mezquita, Stewart, & Ruiperez, 2010; Stewart and Devine, 2000; Stewart, Loughlin, & Rhyno, 2001; Theakston et al., 2004). At the daily level, a potentially relevant situational variable is task accomplishment, i.e., the extent to which students complete important daily tasks such as work obligations and course work. Although no prior research has examined this possibility, task accomplishment may also inuence daily motive specicity. For example, it is plausible that, among highly conscientious students, completion of daily tasks may be associated with daily EM drinking, whereas reported noncompletion of daily tasks would be associated with daily CM drinking. Our overall approach for examining motive specicity in drinking behavior at the daily level is presented in Fig. 1. Specically, we theorize that three between-subjects variables (sensation seeking, conscientiousness, trait CM and EM drinking) and four daily situational variables (negative affect, positive affect, task accomplishment, day of the week) inuence the extent to which students consume alcohol to enhance experience or to cope with negative affect at the daily level. 2. Methods 2.1. Sample and procedures Participants were Introductory Psychology students at a Western Canadian University who, after giving their individual informed consent, completed a 3-part study for partial course credit. Part 1

involved baseline screening for eligibility; Part 2 administered the between-subjects measures, and Part 3 was a daily diary assessment. The study procedures were approved by the Arts, Science & Law Research Ethics Board at the University of Alberta. 2.1.1. Baseline screening A baseline screening instrument was administered in conjunction with other researchers as part of a mass testing session of Introductory Psychology students. A yes/no question screened for current drinking status, and Cooper's (1994) Drinking Motives Questionnaire (DMQ) assessed between-subjects EM ( = 0.90) and CM ( = 0.87) among current drinkers, i.e., those who indicated using alcohol in the past 12 months. A total of 1626 drinkers (42% males; M age = 19.35 years) participated in the baseline screening. These individuals then became eligible to participate in the betweensubjects assessment. 2.1.2. Between-subjects assessment Of the initial sample of 1626 drinkers, 153 volunteered to participate in Part 2 of the study and completed baseline measures assessing demographics, sensation seeking, conscientiousness, and typical alcohol use. Zuckerman's (1994) Sensation Seeking Scale Form V assessed sensation seeking. This instrument includes 40 items that ask participants to select one of two competing self-descriptive statements, one of which reects tendencies to engage in sensation seeking. Aggregate sensation seeking scale scores were used in the present study ( = 0.77). The conscientiousness subscale of the NEO Five Factor Inventory Revised, Short Form (Costa and McCrae, 1985) was used to assess conscientiousness ( = 0.85). Alcohol consumption was assessed using the Alcohol Use Disorders Identication Test (AUDIT; Saunders, Aasland, Babor, de la Fuente, & Grant, 1993; = 0.83 for full-scale AUDIT scores).

Sensation seeking

Conscientiousness

Trait CM / EM Drinking

Daily positive affect

Daily negative affect

Strength of situational CM or EM on drinking days

Daily task accomplishment

Day of the week (fixed)

Fig. 1. Conceptual model of daily, between-subjects, and cross-level moderators of daily motive specicity in student alcohol use.

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183

1177

2.1.3. Daily assessment All 153 respondents who completed the between-subjects measures were then invited to participate in a daily diary supplement to the study. In this phase of the study, participants were given an ID code and password to log on to the study website and were asked to complete a diary over fourteen evenings assessing mood, task accomplishment, and daily alcohol use (yes or no). If a respondent indicated alcohol consumption on a given day, strength of daily EM drinking and daily CM drinking was assessed using the enhancement and coping subscale items from the Drinking Motives Questionnaire (Cooper, 1994), modied to ask about reasons for consuming alcohol on that day. Internal consistency for the daily EM subscale was excellent (s = 0.92 on Day 1 and 0.97 on Day 7). Reliability for the CM subscale was also excellent (s = 0.93 on Day 1 and 0.86 on Day 7). The Positive and Negative Affect Scale (PANAS; Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988) was used to assess daily mood. High levels of positive affect refer to a pleasurable state where one feels active and enthusiastic, while low levels of positive affect reect sadness and low energy. In contrast, negative affect comprises feelings of anger, fear, and other negative emotions, while low levels of negative affect reect feelings of calmness and peace. Single-day reliabilities were also calculated at Day 1 and Day 7; internal consistency estimates for positive affect were 0.88 and 0.88, respectively, while alphas for negative affect were 0.77 and 0.85, respectively. Our task accomplishment measure was developed from a pool of ten items created specically for this study. Two of the ten items diminished Cronbach's alpha for total scale scores and exhibited low item-total correlations, and for those reasons were deleted from the scale. Sample scale items are I managed to nish the things I needed to nish before the end of today, and I did as much as I should have done today to meet the deadlines I am facing during the next week. Response options range from strongly disagree to strongly agree.Table 1 presents the nal set of items used in the present analyses. Alphas for the 8-item scale were 0.90 on Day 1, 0.88 on Day 7, and 0.89 on Day 14. From an initial screened sample of 153 drinkers (M age = 19.35 years), 81 individuals (44.4% males; 55.6% females; M age = 19.44 years) completed all baseline measures and at least one daily diary entry and therefore comprised the analytic sample for this study. Among these participants, 34.6% self-identied as Euro-North American, 23.5% as East Asian, 18.5% as European, 3.7% as African, 2.5% as South Asian, 1.2% as First Nations, 1.2% as Middle Eastern, and 14.8% as Other. There were no differences on any study variables between the baseline sample of 153 participants and the analytic sample of 81 participants.

3. Results 3.1. Baseline measures Means and standard deviations for baseline variables in the study are presented in Table 2. Age was not associated with any of the baseline variables in the present study. Although females were more conscientious (M = 43.98) than were males (M = 40.25; t = 2.5, p b 0.05), there were no other gender differences on relevant study variables. Reported ethnicity did not relate to any of the study variables. Trait EM drinking was positively correlated with sensation seeking (r = 0.45, p b 0.01), while sensation seeking and conscientiousness were inversely related, although the correlation was rather low (r = 0.27, p b 0.05). Trait CM drinking was also positively correlated with sensation seeking (r = 0.33, p b 0.01), but not with conscientiousness (r = 0.12, ns). Finally, trait EM and CM drinking scores were inversely correlated (r = 0.54, p b 0.01). 3.2. Daily measures Means and correlations of daily diary variables across the study period are presented in Table 3. There were no gender differences on enhancement and coping motive scores; nor were there any differences in positive affect aggregated across daily assessments. However, averaged across all diary days, females reported more daily negative affect (M = 17.76) than did males (M = 16.83; t = 1.98, p b 0.05). Of note, daily task accomplishment was positively correlated with daily positive affect (r = 0.30, p b 0.01), and was slightly inversely correlated with daily negative affect (r = 0.11, p b 0.05), but uncorrelated with the drinking-related variables among the study sample. Daily positive affect was positively correlated with daily EM drinking (r = 0.22, p b 0.05), although the correlation was low, and daily negative affect was strongly positively correlated with daily CM drinking (r = 0.54, p b 0.01). Of the 89 reported drinking days in this sample, participants rated EM as their most strongly endorsed motive for using alcohol (or equally strong as another motive) on 40 occasions (44.9% of drinking days), while participants rated CM as their most strongly endorsed (or equally strong) motive for using alcohol on 23 occasions (25.8% of drinking days). Social motives were endorsed on 50.6% of drinking days, and conformity motives were endorsed on 3.4% of drinking days. The number of drinks consumed on drinking days ranged from 1 to 16 (M = 4.22). On average, students drank about once every 8.6 days. These results are similar to drinking behaviors reported by a nationally-representative sample of Canadian undergraduate students (Adlaf, Demers, & Gliksman, 2005). 3.3. Hierarchical linear modeling

Table 1 Internal consistency and item totals for the daily task accomplishment scale. Item I did as much as I should have done today to meet the deadlines I am facing during the next week. I will have to work harder tomorrow to make up for what I did not accomplish today. (reversed) I managed to nish the things I needed to nish before the end of today. At the end of today, I will feel that I have unnished business in school or at work. (reversed) I worked as many hours today as I feel I should have. At the end of today, I will feel caught up with the tasks that I am committed to. Today I did as much as I should have done on longterm projects (e.g., term papers). I will need to catch up tomorrow on things that I did not nish today. (reversed) Item total Alpha if item correlation deleted 0.64 0.68 0.71 0.71 0.69 0.69 0.71 0.65 0.88 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.87 0.88

Hierarchical linear models (HLM; Raudenbush and Bryk, 2002) assessed daily and trait inuences on situational drinking motives, allowing us to determine whether different between-subjects variables moderated relationships between the daily predictors and daily CM and EM ratings. In this approach, daily diary entries were nested within individual respondents. Assessment of daily covariation in experiences (positive affect, negative affect, and task accomplishment) represented the Level 1 variables. Day of the week was modeled as a xed effect to account for day-to-day variations in alcohol use (Carney, Armeli, Tennen, Afeck, and O'Neil, 2000). Level 2 (between-subjects) variables consisted of conscientiousness, sensation seeking, and baseline scores on trait EM or CM drinking, as appropriate. 3.3.1. Analytic strategy for assessing motive specicity Because the primary study variables did not exhibit ethnicity or gender differences, we did not conduct stratied analyses in testing

1178

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183

Table 2 Means, standard deviations, and correlations of baseline variables. 1. 1. Age (in years) 2. Gender 3. Social motive 4. Coping motive 5. Enhancement motive 6. Conformity motive 7. Negative drinking consequences 8. Sensation seeking 9. Conscientiousness 10. AUDIT score Mean Standard deviation 0.05. 0.01. 2. 0.13 3. 0.20 0.16 4. 0.08 0.03 0.46 5. 0.04 0.10 0.61 0.54 6. 0.13 0.06 0.55 0.42 0.36 7. 0.15 0.06 0.54 0.44 0.48 0.21 8. 0.00 0.14 0.43 0.33 0.45 0.28 0.45 9. 0.12 0.27 0.09 0.12 0.01 0.14 0.11 0.27 10. 0.10 0.02 0.52 0.37 0.54 0.36 0.83 0.51 0.08 19.44 3.10 0.56 0.50 3.40 0.94 1.82 0.86 2.90 1.10 1.57 0.65 27.63 2.36 20.88 6.20 42.32 6.90 7.77 5.61

for motive specicity. Instead, we estimated two separate multilevel models; one predicting daily EM drinking, and the other predicting daily CM drinking. Using the same model-building approach and the same initial predictor variables in each model allowed us to examine whether, on days when alcohol was consumed, different direct and trait-moderated effects of situational variables predicted daily EM drinking versus daily CM drinking. Initially, all main effect predictors and interaction terms were entered into each model. Predictor terms were modeled on the intercepts, and day of the week, positive emotions, and negative emotions were each modeled as xed effects. Next, variables not accounting for statistically signicant portions of variance in the outcome measures were removed sequentially, beginning with the predictor with the largest p value, until only statistically signicant predictors remained in the model, with the exception of those variables having one or more cross-level interactions (Ma, 2004). 3.3.2. Predicting daily enhancement drinking motives A null model with no predictors revealed that 35.98% of the variance in daily EM drinking was associated with within-subjects factors, while the remaining 64.02% of the variance was associated with betweensubjects factors. Positive and negative affect were modeled as xed effects because the conditional Level 1 model showed that there was no random variance remaining to be explained. The inclusion of individual predictors and cross-level interaction terms signicantly improved the t of the model (2(8) = 61.65, p b 0.001). Nonsignicant predictors were eliminated sequentially, resulting in the nal model displayed in Table 4. One daily (Level 1) main effect was retained in the nal model. Controlling for day of the week and daily task accomplishment, on days when alcohol was consumed, a one-unit increase in daily positive affect was associated with a signicant increase of 0.11 points in participants' ratings of EM drinking (p b 0.05). Two betweensubjects main effects were also retained in the nal model. Between

subjects and across drinking days, trait measures of EM drinking and sensation seeking were positively related to daily EM drinking. On days when alcohol was consumed, a one-unit increase in trait EM drinking predicted a 2.88-point increase in daily EM drinking, controlling for sensation seeking. A one-unit increase in baseline sensation seeking, controlling for trait EM drinking, corresponded to a 0.36-point increase in daily EM drinking. These main effects were qualied by two signicant cross-level interactions. Controlling for the other predictor variables in the model, there was a reliable cross-level interaction between daily task accomplishment and trait conscientiousness in the prediction of daily EM drinking (b = 0.03; SE = 0.01, t (78) = 3.33, p b 0.01). As shown in Fig. 2, for highly conscientious participants, there was a positive relationship between daily task accomplishment and daily EM drinking. In contrast, for participants with low trait conscientiousness, there was an inverse relationship between daily task accomplishment and daily EM drinking. Results also indicated that between-subjects differences in sensation seeking moderated the relationship between daily task accomplishment and daily EM drinking (b = 0.04, SE= 0.01, t (78) = 3.0, p b 0.01). Fig. 3 shows that, on days when daily task accomplishment was low, participants scoring low or high on sensation seeking were equally likely to report EM drinking. As daily task accomplishment increased, however, high sensation seekers became more likely to report EM drinking, while low sensation seekers became less likely to report EM drinking. 3.3.3. Predicting daily coping drinking motives A null model with no predictors revealed that 25.75% of the variance in daily CM drinking was associated with within-subjects factors, while the remaining 74.25% of the variance could be attributed to between-subjects factors. Inclusion of trait and situational main effects and cross-level interaction terms signicantly improved the t of the model ( 2(14) = 154.17, p b 0.001). Table 5

Table 3 Means, standard deviations, and correlations of daily diary measures. 1. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Day of the week Positive emotions Negative emotions Task accomplishment Desire to drink Drink to enhance Drink to be social Drink to cope Drink to conform Mean Standard deviation 2. 0.06 3. 0.07 0.13 4. 0.09 0.30 0.11 5. 0.09 0.11 0.17 0.07 6. 0.24 0.22 0.12 0.04 0.40 7. 0.24 0.21 0.04 0.06 0.46 0.73 8. 0.10 0.01 0.54 0.08 0.48 0.45 0.40 9. 0.06 0.03 0.27 0.20 0.13 0.28 0.38 0.38 6.71 2.95

4.05 1.98

24.76 7.82

17.36 6.33

22.00 6.45

18.31 6.32

12.34 5.68

12.61 5.32

8.52 4.32

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183 Table 4 HLM model predicting daily endorsement of EM. B Daily variables Day of the week (xed) Positive affect Task accomplishment Between-subjects variables Trait EM (enhancement motives) Sensation seeking Conscientiousness Cross-level interactions Task accomplishment conscientiousness Task accomplishment sensation seeking p b 0.05. p b 0.01. 0.23 0.11 0.04 2.88 0.36 0.12 SE 0.27 0.07 0.06

1179
Low Sensation Seeking High Sensation Seeking

12.37

Enhancement-Motivated Drinking

11.04

9.70

0.59 0.09 0.01

8.37

0.03 0.04

0.01 0.01

7.04 -9.00

-4.80

-0.60

3.59

7.79

Task Accomplishment
presents nal results from the same model building strategy described earlier. Two situational main effects were retained in the nal model. Controlling for day of the week and task accomplishment, a one-unit increase in reported positive affect corresponded to a 0.09-point decrease in CM drinking on days when alcohol was consumed (pb 0.05). A one-unit increase in daily negative affect, in comparison, corresponded to a 0.13point increase in CM drinking (pb 0.05). One between-subjects variable, trait CM drinking, was retained in the nal model. Trait CM predicted a 4.42-point increase in daily CM drinking ratings (pb 0.01). These main effects were qualied by three signicant cross-level interactions. First, controlling for the other predictors, betweensubjects CM drinking moderated the effect of daily positive affect on daily CM drinking (b = 0.12; SE = 0.05, t (76) = 2.26, p b 0.05). As shown in Fig. 4, participants with high levels of trait CM drinking reported higher ratings of daily CM drinking, but became less likely to report daily CM drinking as daily positive affect increased. In contrast, participants with low levels of trait CM drinking were less likely to engage in daily CM drinking, and this relationship was largely unrelated to daily positive affect. Trait CM also moderated the effect of daily negative affect on daily CM drinking (b = 0.18, SE = 0.05, t (76) = 3.41, p b 0.01). As shown in Fig. 5, participants reporting high levels of trait CM were more likely to endorse daily CM drinking; moreover, they became more likely to endorse daily CM drinking as daily negative affect increased. In contrast, there was no relationship between daily negative affect and
Fig. 3. Trait sensation-seeking moderates the effect of daily task accomplishment on strength of daily enhancement-motivated drinking.

daily CM drinking among participants who were low on trait CM drinking. Finally, Fig. 6 shows that conscientiousness moderated the relationship between daily task accomplishment and daily CM drinking (b = 0.02, SE = 0.01, t (70) = 2.68, p b 0.01). Highly conscientious participants were more likely to report daily CM drinking as daily task accomplishment increased. Conversely, among less conscientious participants, daily task accomplishment was largely unrelated to daily CM drinking. In summary, on days when our respondents consumed alcohol, the extent to which respondents endorsed daily EM and CM was predicted by different situational and trait variables. Daily EM scores were positively associated with trait EM, daily positive affect, and trait sensation seeking. These main effects were qualied by two crosslevel interactions involving sensation seeking and situational task accomplishment. In contrast, daily CM scores were positively associated with trait CM and daily negative affect, and were inversely associated with daily positive affect. These main effects were qualied by three cross-level interactions between daily positive affect and between-subjects CM, daily negative affect and between-subjects CM, and daily task accomplishment and trait conscientiousness.

4. Discussion
12.55
Low Conscientiousness High Conscientiousness

Enhancement-Motivated Drinking

To date, research on internally-motivated student alcohol use has focused on identifying subgroups of high risk student drinkers, on
Table 5 HLM model predicting daily endorsement of coping motives. B SE 0.14 0.04 0.06 0.03

10.84

9.13

Daily variables Day of the week (xed) Positive affect Negative affect Task accomplishment Between-subjects variables Trait CM (coping motives) Conscientiousness Cross-level interactions Positive affect trait CM Negative affect trait CM Task accomplishment conscientiousness p b 0.05. p b 0.01.

0.08 0.09 0.13 0.04

7.41

4.42 0.03

0.65 0.05

5.70 -14.00

-6.08

1.84

9.76

17.68

Task Accomplishment
Fig. 2. Trait conscientiousness moderates the effect of daily task accomplishment on strength of daily enhancement-motivated drinking.

0.12 0.18 0.02

0.07 0.08 0.01

1180

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183

12.04

Low Drink to Cope (Typical) High Drink to Cope (Typical)

10.54

Low Conscientiousness High Conscientiousness

Coping-Motivated Drinking

10.48

Coping-Motivated Drinkin
-5.33 2.09 9.52 16.95

9.75

8.92

8.97

7.36

8.19

5.80 -12.76

7.40 -14.00

-6.00

2.00

10.00

18.00

Positive Affect
Fig. 4. Typical coping motives moderate the effect of daily positive affect on daily coping-motivated drinking.

Task Accomplishment
Fig. 6. Trait conscientiousness moderates the effect of daily task accomplishment on strength of daily coping-motivated drinking.

the assumption that high between-subjects scores on trait CM and EM would be associated with greater consumption and alcohol-related problems. This approach has been fruitful, in light of consistent evidence demonstrating that elevated scores on trait CM drinking are associated with alcohol problems (Carey and Correia, 1997; Cooper et al., 1992, 1995; McCormack, 1996; Park and Levenson, 2002; Sadava and Pak, 1993) and that individual differences in both CM and EM are associated with distinct patterns of alcohol consumption and related problems (Merrill & Read, 2010). Daily process studies have rened our understanding of CM drinking, with a growing body of evidence supporting the view that individual differences in CM drinking moderate effects of daily negative affect and other negative daily events on quantity of alcohol consumption (Grant, Stewart, & Mohr, 2009; Mohr et al., 2005; Park, Armeli, & Tennen, 2004). Despite these advances, almost all research in this area views internally-motivated drinking solely as a between-subjects phenomenon. Although this is useful for characterizing alcohol consumption among drinkers scoring at extreme ends of CM drinking and EM drinking distributions, overemphasis on internal drinking motives as an individual difference phenomenon has prevented an examination of motive specicity, i.e., the extent to which situational drinking episodes are more or less motivated by CM or EM. To address this issue, the present study explored predictors of EM and CM drinking at the daily level. We proposed that three between-subjects variables
16.37
Low Drink to Cope (Typical) High Drink to Cope (Typical)

(sensation seeking, conscientiousness, trait CM and EM) and four situational/daily variables (negative affect, positive affect, task accomplishment, day of the week) inuence the extent to which students drink to enhance experience or to cope with negative affect on days where alcohol is consumed. In general, the present results provided a replication and extension of Cooper et al.'s model of internal drinking motives at the daily level. Specically, our results conceptually replicated Cooper et al.'s (1995) ndings that daily negative affect and trait sensation seeking differentially predict the extent to which alcohol consumption is motivated by coping or enhancement, respectively, at the daily level. The present study also provided support for a theoretical extension to this model by incorporating ndings that most student drinkers think strategically about when, where, and how they consume alcohol (Benton et al., 2004; Delva et al., 2004; Martens et al., 2005, 2007). Specically, we observed that trait conscientiousness and daily task accomplishment moderated the effects of sensation seeking and daily negative affect on the extent to which alcohol consumption on any given day is motivated by coping or enhancement. 4.1. Drinking to enhance experience As predicted, sensation seeking exhibited motive specicity on days when alcohol was used: sensation seeking predicted daily EM drinking, but not daily CM drinking. These ndings replicate previous research indicating that sensation seeking is particularly important in the prediction of EM drinking (Cooper et al., 1995; Magid et al., 2007), but at the daily level. These results were qualied by an interaction such that high sensation seekers were more likely to endorse daily EM on days with high levels of task accomplishment, suggesting that these student drinkers wait for an appropriate opportunity to pursue stimulation by drinking to enhance experience. In contrast, low sensation seekers who had met their daily responsibilities were less likely to report drinking to enhance their experience, suggesting that when they have completed their daily tasks and responsibilities, these individuals seek out alternative activities or drink for reasons other than enhancement. Also as anticipated, conscientiousness exhibited motive specicity on days when alcohol was used: highly conscientious individuals were more likely to report drinking to enhance experience when they had completed their daily tasks. In contrast, less conscientious participants were more likely to report drinking to enhance experience when they had failed to complete their daily tasks. This moderator effect suggests that enhancement-motivated drinking

Coping-Motivated Drinking

13.74

11.12

8.49

5.87 -7.36

2.04

11.45

20.85

30.26

Negative Affect
Fig. 5. Typical coping motives moderate the effect of daily negative affect on strength of daily coping-motivated drinking.

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183

1181

among students who are less conscientious may be maladaptive because it occurs more frequently when other responsibilities have been left incomplete. In contrast, drinking to enhance experience among students who are more conscientious appears to be more adaptive because it is more likely to occur when risks (i.e. deadlines and other tasks needing completion) have been minimized. Future research should examine whether drinking to enhance experience is more common and whether alcohol-related problems are more likely to occur among student drinkers who score low on trait conscientiousness and who chronically do not complete daily tasks. 4.2. Drinking to cope with negative affect As predicted, negative affect exhibited motive specicity on days when alcohol was consumed: daily negative affect predicted daily CM ratings, but not EM ratings. These results were qualied by an interaction indicating that high trait-CM students were more likely to report daily CM drinking when they reported high levels of daily negative affect. In contrast, low trait-CM students were relatively unaffected by daily negative affect in relation to daily CM drinking. These ndings replicate previous research indicating that negative affect is particularly inuential in motivating daily coping motivated drinking among students who typically report drinking to cope with negative affect (Cooper et al., 1995; Flynn, 2000; Mohr et al., 2005; Park et al., 2004). Two other signicant interactions provide a more differentiated perspective on CM drinking at the daily level. On drinking days, high trait-CM students were less likely to endorse daily-level CM drinking as positive mood increased. Mohr et al. (2005) reported a similar negative relationship between average daily positive mood and typical endorsement of CM, although they did not examine coping motivated drinking at the daily level. Finally, highly conscientious participants were more likely to report daily CM drinking on days with high task accomplishment, suggesting that these students may feel more at liberty to drink for coping motivated reasons when their tasks are completed, perhaps as a form of postlabor repair and/or tension reduction. Future research should explore whether trait conscientiousness moderates the relationship between coping motivated drinking, alcohol consumption, and related problems. 4.3. Comparing EM and CM models A key feature of both models was that between-subjects predictors generally accounted for more variance in daily EM and CM ratings than did situational factors. This strengthens the case for including trait variables in motivational models of alcohol use (Kuntsche et al., 2005; Mezquita et al., 2010). Another related nding across the two models was that the strongest predictors of daily enhancement motivated and coping motivated drinking were between-subjects EM and CM ratings, respectively. These results conrm that trait differences in internally-motivated drinking are potent inuences on daily CM and EM. With respect to situational inuences, slightly more than one-third of the variance in the daily EM model, and approximately one-quarter of the variance in the daily CM model, was associated with daily factors such as mood and task accomplishment. These ndings indicate that the day-to-day changes in university students' mood and completion of tasks have also substantial inuence on their reasons for drinking at the daily level, although the impact is less than that of more stable traits. Finally, a primary difference between the two models was the presence of interactions involving daily positive and negative affect in the coping motivation model and only positive affect in the enhancement motivation model. This pattern for coping motivated drinking strengthens the argument that coping motivated drinking is very much associated with affect regulation (Cox & Klinger, 2002). In contrast, positive affect but not negative affect predicted daily endorsement of enhancement moti-

vated drinking, which appears to be more concerned with seeking out stimulation and positive experiences. Moreover, the presence of positive affect in both models establishes the key role that the positive emotions play in the prediction of either type of daily internal drinking motives. 4.4. Limitations and future directions One limitation of this study concerns the direction of the relationships observed, and particularly the relationship between mood and internal drinking motives. The present study cannot determine conclusively whether a negative mood, for example, preceded CM drinking on a given day, or whether the negative mood followed, or was experienced simultaneously with, drinking to cope. Participants reported their daily mood, alcohol use, and motives only once in the present study. A next step in the research would be to assess mood before, during, and after internally motivated alcohol use, either at specic times, or by asking participants to provide data when considering alcohol use and then following the drinking behavior. A lagged design might also prove useful in future research in which mood from the previous day predicts the current day's alcohol use. An additional limitation in the study was attrition over the fourteen days of the daily diary. Some 75.3% of participants completed the diary on Day 7; 53% percent completed Day 11 and only 18.5% completed Day 14. However, HLM weights those participants who complete more days more heavily than it weights those participants who provide less data. In this way, the method of analysis can make use of all the data rather than discarding data from participants who failed to complete all the diaries, as would be required by a repeated-measures ANOVA design. However, it may be that those participants who contributed the most data are not representative of all participants on key study variables; for example, they may tend to drink less heavily or might be more conscientious. A limitation to generalizability is the use of a university student sample in this study. Research on the natural history of alcohol use across the university experience indicates that the quantity and frequency of alcohol consumption typically increase upon entry into the university environment (Baer, 2002; Borsari, Murphy, & Barnett, 2007; Perkins, 2002), and then decreases again following graduation (Perkins, 1999, 2002; Park & Levenson, 2002). Samples of younger adolescents and of older adults may reveal patterns of EM and CM drinking that differ from those observed in this study. As well, the sample might not be representative of the general university population. EM drinkers were overselected for participation in this study. Moreover, frequent and heavy drinkers might not have participated in our study. Despite these limitations, the present study provides a comprehensive approach to understanding internally-motivated student alcohol use. Specically, our results replicate Cooper et al.'s (1995) original ndings concerning the differential roles of sensation seeking and negative affect in EM and CM drinking, respectively, but at the daily level. Moreover, the present study demonstrated the value of including trait conscientiousness and daily task accomplishment in models of internally-motivated drinking. Further research is required, however, to replicate these ndings and to conrm that the harm reduction perspective implied by conscientiousness and daily task accomplishment provides added explanatory value in understanding when students drink to enhance experience or to cope with negative affect. Finally, from an applied perspective, the present results have potential implications for developing interventions designed to reduce hazardous and harmful alcohol use among students. If daily EM and CM drinking do exhibit motive specicity, as implied by our results, tailored intervention approaches could be developed to target the unique conguration of trait and situational variables that predict the psychological meaning of daily alcohol consumption patterns. For example, while prior research tells us that high trait-CM drinkers are

1182

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183 Flynn, H. A. (2000). Comparison of cross-sectional and daily reports in studying the relationship between depression and use of alcohol in response to stress in college students. Alcoholism, Clinical and Experimental Research, 24, 4852. Grant, V. V., Stewart, S. H., & Mohr, C. D. (2009). Coping-anxiety and coping-depression motives predict different daily mood-drinking relationships. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 23, 226237. Hingson, R. W., Zha, W., & Weitzman, E. R. (2009). Magnitude and trends in alcoholrelated morbidity and mortality among US college students ages 1824, 1996 2005. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, Supplement No. 16, 1220. Hogan, J., & Ones, D. S. (1997). Conscientiousness and integrity at work. In R. Hogan, J. Johnson, & S. Briggs (Eds.), Handbook of personality psychology (pp. 849870). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Holahan, C., Moos, R., Holahan, C., Ruth, C., & Randall, P. (2003). Drinking to cope and alcohol use and abuse in unipolar depression: A 10-year model. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 112, 159165. Hussong, A. M., Galloway, C. A., & Feagans, L. A. (2005). Coping motives as a moderator of daily mood-drinking covariation. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 66, 344354. Jamison, J., & Myers, L. B. (2008). Peer-group and price inuence students drinking along with planned behavior. Alcohol and Alcoholism, 43(4), 492497. Kassel, J. D., Jackson, S. I., & Unrod, M. U. (2000). Generalized expectancies for negative mood regulation and problem drinking among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63, 332340. Knight, J. R., Wechsler, H., Duo, M., Seibring, M., Weitzman, E. R., & Schuckit, M. A. (2002). Alcohol abuse and dependence among U.S. college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63, 263270. Kuntsche, E. N., Knibbe, R. A., Gmel, G., & Engels, R. C. M. E. (2005). Who drinks and why? A review of socio-demographic, personality, and contextual issues behind the drinking motives in young people. Addictive Behaviors, 31, 18441857. Littleeld, A. K., Sher, K. J., & Wood, P. K. (2010). Do drinking motives mediate the relation between personality change and maturing out of problem drinking? Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 119(1), 93105. Ma, X. (2004). Advanced seminar in hierarchical linear modeling. In G. Brannigan, & H. Krahn (Chairs), Western statistics seminars. Workshop conducted at the University of Alberta and University of Calgary Data Training Schools and Statistics Seminars, Calgary, AB, Canada. Magid, V., MacLean, M. G., & Colder, C. R. (2007). Differentiating between sensation seeking and impulsivity through their mediated relations with alcohol use and problems. Addictive Behaviors, 32(10), 20462061. Martens, M. P., Ferrier, A. G., Sheehy, M. J., Corbett, K., Anderson, D. A., & Simmons, A. (2005). Development of the protective behavioral strategies scale. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 66, 698705. Martens, M. P., Pedersen, E. R., LaBrie, J. W., Ferrier, A. G., & Cimini, M. D. (2007). Measuring alcohol-related protective behavioral strategies among college students: Further examination of the protective behavioral strategies scale. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 21, 307315. McCormack, A. S. (1996). Drinking in stressful situations: College men under pressure. College Student Journal, 30, 6577. Merrill, J. E., & Read, J. P. (2010). Motivational pathways to unique types of alcohol consequences. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 24, 705711. Mezquita, L., Stewart, S., & Ruiperez, M. (2010). Big-ve personality domains predict internal drinking motives in young adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 49(3), 240245. Mohr, C. D., Armeli, S., Tennen, H., Todd, M., Clark, J., & Carney, M. (2005). Moving beyond the keg party: A daily process study of college student drinking motivations. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 19, 392403. O'Malley, P. M., & Johnston, L. D. (2002). Epidemiology of alcohol and other drug use among American college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 41, 2339. Park, C. L., & Levenson, M. R. (2002). Drinking to cope among college students: Prevalence, problems and coping processes. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 63(4), 486497. Park, C., Armeli, S., & Tennen, H. (2004). The daily stress and coping process and alcohol use among college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 65, 126135. Perkins, H. W. (1999). Stress-Motivated Drinking in Collegiate and post-collegiate young adulthood: Life course and gender patterns. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 60(2), 219227. Perkins, H. W. (2002). Surveying the damage: A review of research on consequences of alcohol misuse in college populations. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 14, 91100. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Read, J. P., Wood, M. D., Kahler, C. W., Maddock, J. E., & Palfai, T. P. (2003). Examining the role of drinking motives in college student alcohol use and problems. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17, 1323. Sadava, S. W., & Pak, A. W. (1993). Stress-related problem drinking and alcohol problems: A longitudinal study and extension of Marlatt's model. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Science, 25, 446464. Saunders, J. B., Aasland, O. G., Babor, T. F., de la Fuente, J. R., & Grant, M. (1993). Development of the Alcohol Use Disorders Identication Test (AUDIT): WHO collaborative project on early detection of persons with harmful alcohol consumption. II. Addiction, 88, 791804. Stewart, S. H., & Devine, H. (2000). Relations between personality and drinking motives in young people. Personality and Individual Differences, 29, 495511. Stewart, S. H., Loughlin, H. L., & Rhyno, E. (2001). Internal drinking motives mediate personality domain-drinking relations in young adults. Personality and Individual Differences, 30, 271286. Theakston, J. A., Stewart, S. H., Dawson, M. Y., Knowlden-Loewen, S. A. B., & Lehman, D. R. (2004). Big-Five personality domains predict drinking motives. Personality and Individual Differences, 37, 971984.

at increased risk for drinking problems (Holahan et al., 2003), and that they lack other, more functional, means of coping with distress (Fromme & Rivet, 1994), the present results suggest that conscientiousness and daily task accomplishment could represent targets for intervention activities designed to decrease the extent to which alcohol consumption on any given occasion is motivated by coping with negative affect. More broadly, the present results suggest that interventions could be developed for students to help them identify their own typical drinking motives, mood-related triggers, and harm reduction activities and encourage them to use this information to change the reasons they consume alcohol on a daily basis.
Role of funding sources Funding for this study was provided by a Department of Psychology, University of Alberta, grant to KJA and by a Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council operating grant held jointly by DK and Dr. David Miall (University of Alberta). The funding sources had no involvement in study design, collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, writing the manuscript, and the decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

Contributors KJA, DK, and TCW designed the study. KJA collected and analyzed the data and wrote the rst draft of the manuscript, with assistance from DK and TCW. All authors substantially contributed to and have approved the nal manuscript. Conict of interest All authors declare that they have no conicts of interest.

Acknowledgments The authors thank Erin Barker, PhD, Nancy Galambos, PhD, Andrea Howard, PhD, and Ambikaipakan Senthilselvan, PhD for their assistance with this project. We also owe a special debt of gratitude to our enthusiastic and willing participants.

References
Adlaf, E., Demers, A., & Gliksman, L. (2005). Canadian campus survey 2004. Toronto: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. Baer, J. S. (2002). Student factors: Understanding individual variation in college drinking. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. Supplement, 14, 4053. Benton, S. L., Schmidt, J. L., Newton, F. B., Shin, K., Benton, S. A., & Newton, D. W. (2004). College student protective strategies and drinking consequences. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 65, 115121. Blane, H. T. (1979). Middle-aged alcoholics and young drinkers. In H. T. Blane, & M. E. Chafetz (Eds.), Youth, alcohol, and social policy (pp. 538). New York: Plenum. Borsari, B., Murphy, J. G., & Barnett, N. P. (2007). Predictors of alcohol use during the rst year of college: Implications for prevention. Addictive Behaviors, 32(10), 20622086. Carey, K. B., & Correia, C. J. (1997). Drinking motives predict alcohol-related problems in college students. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 58, 100105. Carney, M. A., Armeli, S., Tennen, H., Afeck, G., & O'Neil, T. (2000). Positive and negative daily events, perceived stress, and alcohol use: A diary study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 788798. Comeau, N., Stewart, S. H., & Loba, P. (2001). The relations of trait anxiety, anxiety sensitivity, and sensation seeking to adolescents' motivations for alcohol, cigarette, and marijuana use. Addictive Behaviors, 26, 803825. Cooper, M. L. (1994). Motivations for alcohol use among adolescents: Development and validation of a four-factor model. Psychological Assessment, 6, 117128. Cooper, M. L., Frone, M. R., Russell, M., & Mudar, P. (1995). Drinking to regulate positive and negative affect: A motivational model of alcohol use. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69, 9901005. Cooper, M. L., Russell, M., Skinner, J., Frone, M. R., & Mudar, P. (1992). Stress and alcohol use: Moderating effects of gender, coping, and alcohol expectancies. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 101, 139152. Costa, P. T., Jr., & McCrae, R. R. (1985). NEO PI-R professional manual. Odessa, Florida: Psychological Assessment Resources. Cox, W. M., & Klinger, E. (1988). A motivational model of alcohol use. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 97, 168180. Cyders, M. A., Flory, K., Rainer, S., & Smith, G. T. (2009). The role of personality dispositions to risky behavior in predicting rst-year college drinking. Addiction, 104(2), 193202. Delva, J., Smith, M. P., Howell, R. L., Harrison, D. F., Wilke, D., & Jackson, D. L. (2004). A study of the relationship between protective behaviors and drinking consequences among undergraduate college students. Journal of American College Health, 53, 1826. Donovan, J. E., Jessor, R., & Jessor, L. (1983). Problem drinking in adolescence and young adulthood. Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 44, 109137. Fromme, K., & Rivet, K. (1994). Young adults' coping style as a predictor of their alcohol use and response to daily events. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 23, 8597.

K.J. Arbeau et al. / Addictive Behaviors 36 (2011) 11741183 Toomey, T. L., & Wagenaar, A. C. (2002). Environmental policies to reduce college drinking: Options and research ndings. Journal of Studies on Alcohol. Supplement, 14, 193205. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 10631070.

1183

Wechsler, H., Lee, J. E., Nelson, T. E., & Kuo, M. (2002). Underage college students' drinking behavior, access to alcohol, and the inuence of deterrence policies. Journal of American College Health, 50, 223236. Zuckerman, M. (1994). Behavioral expressions and biosocial bases of sensation seeking. New York: Cambridge University Press.