Table 1.
Item | Factor Loadings | Percentage of students somewhat or very likely to seek help |
||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
I | II | III | M | SD | ||
1. Decide on your own to call and make an appointment with the campus counseling center (free of charge) |
.12 | .76 | −.01 | 1.83 | 1.09 | 27.41% |
2. Attend an Alcoholics Anonymous Meeting | −.18 | .95 | .01 | 1.59 | .98 | 21.83% |
3. Make an appointment with a counselor/ psychologist in the community (assume fee of approx $100 per session unless you have insurance) |
−.15 | .82 | −.01 | 1.40 | .83 | 25.89% |
4. Talk to a friend | .06 | −.03 | .85 | 3.32 | .87 | 72.08% |
5. Talk to a relative | −.11 | .08 | .76 | 2.81 | 1.05 | 58.88% |
6. Search the internet for ways to reduce your drinking | .30 | −.02 | .35 | 2.65 | 1.15 | 54.82% |
7. Talk to a clergy member, minister | .07 | .38 | .14 | 1.66 | .94 | 21.32% |
8. Talk to your doctor or nurse at the Campus Health Center | .31 | .45 | .05 | 1.96 | 1.08 | 34.01% |
9. Complete a program via email | .86 | −.09 | .02 | 2.12 | 1.04 | 37.56% |
10. Complete a program that entailed several telephone conversations with a counselor |
.57 | .28 | −.06 | 1.83 | .95 | 27.4% |
11. Complete a one-hour counseling session that provided information/feedback about drinking at a convenient but private location on campus such as the medical clinic, dorms, or student center |
.27 | .63 | −.03 | 2.14 | 1.14 | 42.13% |
12. Complete a brief online program that provided information/feedback about drinking |
.95 | −.06 | −.09 | 2.35 | 1.17 | 47.21% |
13. Read a pamphlet or book that provides information about reducing alcohol use |
.62 | −.05 | .19 | 2.63 | 1.25 | 54.31% |
14. Complete a one-hour interactive program on a computer (CD-ROM) that was available on campus (assuming you were aware of such a program, invited to do so, and it was free) |
.84 | .00 | −.04 | 2.19 | 1.19 | 39.09% |
Note. A three-factor solution was found: formal, informal, and anonymous help-seeking resources. Eigenvalues for the first three factors (6.28, 1.67, and 1.33, respectively) were larger than what would be expected by chance given the number of items and the sample size, whereas the fourth eigenvalue (0.83) was much smaller than what would be expected by chance. This solution accounted for 66.31% of the initial variance and 58.01% of the extracted variance.