4.1 Article

UPPS-P facets of impulsivity and alcohol use patterns in college and noncollege emerging adults

期刊

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE
卷 44, 期 6, 页码 695-704

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/00952990.2018.1503280

关键词

Alcohol; alcohol use; binge drinking; emerging adults; impulsivity; college students

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Alcohol use and related problems reach a peak in emerging adulthood. Impulsivity is a multifaceted construct known to be involved in emerging adult alcohol use. Few studies have examined impulsivity and alcohol use across both college attending and noncollege attending emerging adults. Objectives: To clarify the multifaceted nature of impulsivity and its links to emerging adult alcohol use, this study investigated whether the five distinct facets of the UPPS-P model of impulsivity were predictive of three different behavioral outcomes: alcohol intake, alcohol related problems and binge drinking. In addition, the moderating effects of college attendance were tested. Methods: A community sample comprising 273 Australian college and noncollege attendees (58.6% women; 41.4% men) aged between 18 and 30years (M-age=23.71, SD=2.81). Results: Multiple regression analyses demonstrated that lack of premeditation predicted alcohol intake and binge drinking behavior, whilst positive and negative urgency predicted alcohol related problems. Moderation analyses revealed that the effects of impulsivity on alcohol patterns were consistent for college and noncollege attending emerging adults. Conclusion: These findings highlight the importance of impulsive urgency (both positive and negative) in emerging adult problematic alcohol use, and support the generalizability of college samples to broader emerging adult populations. Emerging adults may use alcohol to avoid negative mood states and further enhance positive mood states. Improved emotional regulation may help both college and non-college emerging adults reduce their alcohol use.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据