Psychometric assessment of the comprehensive effects of alcohol questionnaire: Comparing a brief version to the original full scale

Lindsay S. Ham; Sherry H. Stewart; Peter J. Norton; Debra A. Hope

doi:10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9

Psychometric assessment of the comprehensive effects of alcohol questionnaire: Comparing a brief version to the original full scale

Lindsay S. Ham, Sherry H. Stewart, Peter J. Norton, Debra A. Hope

Medicine

Research output: Contribution to journal › Review article › peer-review

141 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The current set of studies compared the psychometric properties of the original Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire (CEOA) to a 15-item version (B-CEOA) in a nonclinical undergraduate sample (N = 581), and attempted to replicate and extend the B-CEOA findings in an undergraduate sample referred to an alcohol intervention (N = 734). Psychometric assessment included construct validity, internal consistency, and concurrent validity, using both "positive" and "negative" expectancy items in all analyses. Results provided further support for the empirical validity of the original CEOA, and provided support for the use of the B-CEOA despite the reduction in the number of items. The B-CEOA factor structures obtained using exploratory and confirmatory techniques provided support for a 4-factor structure of expectancies and 3-factor structure of valuations. Findings reveal potential problems with "positive" and "negative" expectancy items. Trade-offs regarding factor structure, internal consistency, and administration time should be considered in using the B-CEOA vs. the CEOA.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	141-158
Number of pages	18
Journal	Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment
Volume	27
Issue number	3
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9
Publication status	Published - Sept 2005

Bibliographical note

Funding Information:
The paper was completed during the first author’s predoctoral internship at the Medical University of South Carolina. The first author is now affiliated with the Department of Psychology, Florida International University. Study 1 was supported by an operating grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada awarded to the second author. The second author is supported through an Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Study 2 was supported in part by a National Research Service Award Predoctoral Fellowship (1 F31 AA13462-01A1) from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism awarded to the first author. The authors thank Brenda Lindsay and Heather Lee Loughlin and all other undergraduate research assistants who assisted with data collection and data entry. Thanks are also due to University of Nebraska-Lincoln graduate students who served as therapists in the Alcohol Skills Training Program.

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

Clinical Psychology

Access to Document

10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9

Cite this

@article{df905795a888465d84f879facf4fae71,

title = "Psychometric assessment of the comprehensive effects of alcohol questionnaire: Comparing a brief version to the original full scale",

abstract = "The current set of studies compared the psychometric properties of the original Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire (CEOA) to a 15-item version (B-CEOA) in a nonclinical undergraduate sample (N = 581), and attempted to replicate and extend the B-CEOA findings in an undergraduate sample referred to an alcohol intervention (N = 734). Psychometric assessment included construct validity, internal consistency, and concurrent validity, using both {"}positive{"} and {"}negative{"} expectancy items in all analyses. Results provided further support for the empirical validity of the original CEOA, and provided support for the use of the B-CEOA despite the reduction in the number of items. The B-CEOA factor structures obtained using exploratory and confirmatory techniques provided support for a 4-factor structure of expectancies and 3-factor structure of valuations. Findings reveal potential problems with {"}positive{"} and {"}negative{"} expectancy items. Trade-offs regarding factor structure, internal consistency, and administration time should be considered in using the B-CEOA vs. the CEOA.",

author = "Ham, {Lindsay S.} and Stewart, {Sherry H.} and Norton, {Peter J.} and Hope, {Debra A.}",

note = "Funding Information: The paper was completed during the first author{\textquoteright}s predoctoral internship at the Medical University of South Carolina. The first author is now affiliated with the Department of Psychology, Florida International University. Study 1 was supported by an operating grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada awarded to the second author. The second author is supported through an Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Study 2 was supported in part by a National Research Service Award Predoctoral Fellowship (1 F31 AA13462-01A1) from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism awarded to the first author. The authors thank Brenda Lindsay and Heather Lee Loughlin and all other undergraduate research assistants who assisted with data collection and data entry. Thanks are also due to University of Nebraska-Lincoln graduate students who served as therapists in the Alcohol Skills Training Program.",

year = "2005",

month = sep,

doi = "10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9",

language = "English",

volume = "27",

pages = "141--158",

journal = "Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment",

issn = "0882-2689",

publisher = "Springer New York",

number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Psychometric assessment of the comprehensive effects of alcohol questionnaire

T2 - Comparing a brief version to the original full scale

AU - Ham, Lindsay S.

AU - Stewart, Sherry H.

AU - Norton, Peter J.

AU - Hope, Debra A.

N1 - Funding Information: The paper was completed during the first author’s predoctoral internship at the Medical University of South Carolina. The first author is now affiliated with the Department of Psychology, Florida International University. Study 1 was supported by an operating grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada awarded to the second author. The second author is supported through an Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. Study 2 was supported in part by a National Research Service Award Predoctoral Fellowship (1 F31 AA13462-01A1) from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism awarded to the first author. The authors thank Brenda Lindsay and Heather Lee Loughlin and all other undergraduate research assistants who assisted with data collection and data entry. Thanks are also due to University of Nebraska-Lincoln graduate students who served as therapists in the Alcohol Skills Training Program.

PY - 2005/9

Y1 - 2005/9

N2 - The current set of studies compared the psychometric properties of the original Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire (CEOA) to a 15-item version (B-CEOA) in a nonclinical undergraduate sample (N = 581), and attempted to replicate and extend the B-CEOA findings in an undergraduate sample referred to an alcohol intervention (N = 734). Psychometric assessment included construct validity, internal consistency, and concurrent validity, using both "positive" and "negative" expectancy items in all analyses. Results provided further support for the empirical validity of the original CEOA, and provided support for the use of the B-CEOA despite the reduction in the number of items. The B-CEOA factor structures obtained using exploratory and confirmatory techniques provided support for a 4-factor structure of expectancies and 3-factor structure of valuations. Findings reveal potential problems with "positive" and "negative" expectancy items. Trade-offs regarding factor structure, internal consistency, and administration time should be considered in using the B-CEOA vs. the CEOA.

AB - The current set of studies compared the psychometric properties of the original Comprehensive Effects of Alcohol Questionnaire (CEOA) to a 15-item version (B-CEOA) in a nonclinical undergraduate sample (N = 581), and attempted to replicate and extend the B-CEOA findings in an undergraduate sample referred to an alcohol intervention (N = 734). Psychometric assessment included construct validity, internal consistency, and concurrent validity, using both "positive" and "negative" expectancy items in all analyses. Results provided further support for the empirical validity of the original CEOA, and provided support for the use of the B-CEOA despite the reduction in the number of items. The B-CEOA factor structures obtained using exploratory and confirmatory techniques provided support for a 4-factor structure of expectancies and 3-factor structure of valuations. Findings reveal potential problems with "positive" and "negative" expectancy items. Trade-offs regarding factor structure, internal consistency, and administration time should be considered in using the B-CEOA vs. the CEOA.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=17444384530&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=17444384530&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9

DO - 10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:17444384530

SN - 0882-2689

VL - 27

SP - 141

EP - 158

JO - Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment

JF - Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment

IS - 3

ER -

Psychometric assessment of the comprehensive effects of alcohol questionnaire: Comparing a brief version to the original full scale

Abstract

Bibliographical note

ASJC Scopus Subject Areas

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this