Send email for updates


About updates
Research abstract

This entry is for a study added to the Effectiveness Bank but not (or not yet) fully analysed. Usually the entry consists only of the reference and if available the original abstract with no comments or material changes. The original study was not published by Findings; click Title to order a copy. Free reprints may be available from the authors – click prepared e-mail. Links to other documents. Hover over for notes. Click to highlight passage referred to. Unfold extra text Unfold supplementary text

Title and link for copying Comment/query to editor

Brief alcohol intervention for college drinkers: How brief is?

Kulesza M., Apperson M., Larimer M.E. et al.
Addictive Behaviors: 2010, 35(7), 730–733.
Unable to obtain a copy by clicking title? Try asking the author for a reprint by adapting this prepared e-mail or by writing to Dr Copeland at copelan@lsu.edu.

This US study found that in the short term, 50 minutes of motivational counselling with student drinkers was no more effective in reducing alcohol consumption than 10 minutes of motivational counselling.

Summary Brief interventions for college student drinkers have been shown to be effective in reducing both the amount of alcohol consumed, and the number of alcohol-related problems. However, the length of the brief intervention varies substantially across studies, for example, from five to 50 minutes. This US study sought to find out whether outcomes would differ between two brief interventions of differing durations.

114 undergraduate students who drank alcohol heavily were randomly assigned to one of three groups: either 10 minutes of motivational counselling, 50 minutes of motivational counselling, or a six-week wait before being counselled. The brief interventions were carried out two weeks after an initial assessment. Both were based on the BASICS harm reduction framework, created specifically for college students, which included a motivational interviewing component intended to facilitate discussions about typical drinking patterns, drinking consequences, and peer drinking ‘norms’.

All participants were assessed at baseline (before any intervention had taken place), and then again four weeks after the interventions. The researchers measured alcohol consumption, alcohol-related problems, and protective behavioural strategies (for example, alternating alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks, and setting consumption limits).

Compared with the waiting-list control group, neither intervention showed advantages for reducing alcohol-related problems or increasing protective behaviours. However, there were significantly greater reductions in alcohol consumption after the 10-minute intervention than in the control group. This was not the case after the 50-minute intervention, though when directly compared with the 10-minute intervention, outcomes did not significantly differ.

The results of this study suggest that a very brief intervention (10 minutes) could produce short-term reductions in alcohol consumption for this population.


Findings logo commentary The key advantages of a short brief intervention, compared with a longer brief intervention, are lower costs, and a shorter time commitment for both participants and practitioners. Though this study does provide some evidence that a short brief intervention might be preferable to a longer intervention or no intervention, the overall gains of the short intervention were small. The short intervention succeeded on only one of three measures, and this was when tested four weeks after the intervention. Whether there would be any medium to long-term gains is unknown.

All the participants in this study were psychology undergraduates. Most were white (84%) and female (72%), and they averaged 20 years of age. The researchers noted that this was fairly representative of psychology students in that university, but not representative of the wider student population.

Last revised 27 November 2015. First uploaded 06 November 2015

Comment/query to editor
Give us your feedback on the site (one-minute survey)
Open Effectiveness Bank home page
Add your name to the mailing list to be alerted to new studies and other site updates


Top 10 most closely related documents on this site. For more try a subject or free text search

STUDY 2011 Cluster randomised trial of the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for universal prevention

STUDY 2009 What makes group MET work? A randomized controlled trial of college student drinkers in mandated alcohol diversion

REVIEW 2012 Efficacy of brief alcohol screening intervention for college students (BASICS): a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

STUDY 2010 Clinical outcomes of a brief motivational intervention for heavy drinking mandated college students: a pilot study

REVIEW 2014 Interventions to reduce substance misuse among vulnerable young people

STUDY 2010 Providing web-based feedback and social norms information to reduce student alcohol intake: a multisite investigation

STUDY 2009 Dismantling motivational interviewing and feedback for college drinkers: a randomized clinical trial

REVIEW 2011 Effectiveness of motivational interviewing interventions for adolescent substance use behavior change: a meta-analytic review

STUDY 2014 Web-based alcohol screening and brief intervention for university students: a randomized trial

REVIEW 2010 Computer-delivered interventions for alcohol and tobacco use: a meta-analysis