Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2008 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: Addict Behav. 2007 Jun 28;32(11):2529–2548. doi: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2007.06.017

Table 4.

Effect of intervention and booster condition on process variables

Measure BMI (N = 111) M (SD) CDI (N = 111) M (SD) BST (N = 114) M (SD) No BST (N = 108) M (SD) df F (Time) F (Interv. x Time) F (BST x Time)
Motivation
 Baseline 5.25 (3.40) 5.51 (3.44) -- --
 Post-intervention 5.82 (3.67) 5.90 (3.32) -- -- 1,182 4.93* 0.16 --
Perception of peer drinking
 Baseline 3.15 (0.79) 3.20 (0.78) 3.16 (0.76) 3.19 (0.76)
 3 mo. follow up 2.96 (0.71) 3.00 (0.80) 3.02 (0.74) 2.94 (0.77) 1,202 9.48** 0.05 0.69
 12 mo. follow up 2.86 (0.68) 3.12 (0.82) 2.99 (0.78) 2.99 (0.75) 1,206 7.95** 3.25 0.21
Behavioral strategies
 Baseline 61.20 (12.88) 64.43 (14.42) 62.50 (13.84) 63.29 (13.73)
 3 mo. follow up 63.56 (15.00) 62.43 (15.12) 62.76 (14.56) 63.23 (15.59) 1,193 0.86 4.62* 0.50
 12 mo. follow up 63.71 (15.79) 62.61 (15.42) 63.27 (15.28) 63.05 (15.94) 1,198 0.51 8.49** 0.76

Note. BMI = Brief Motivational Intervention; CDI = Computer-Delivered Intervention; BST = Booster. Perception of peer drinking reflects perception of typical number of drinks per occasion. N’s are slightly different between follow-ups and between measures, due to missing data on self-administered measures.

p<.08.

*

p<.05.

**

p < .01.

***

p < .001