Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29040825›Full record

ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2017

Comparing the predictive validity of the four-factor and five-factor (bifactor) measurement structures of the drinking motives questionnaire.

Andrew Lac, Candice D Donaldson

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Andrew LacDepartment of Psychology, University of Colorado at Colorado Springs, 1420 Austin Bluffs Pkwy, Colorado Springs, CO 80918, USA. Electronic address: alac@uccs.edu.
Candice D DonaldsonDepartment of Psychology, Claremont Graduate University, 150 E. 10th St., Claremont, CA 91711, USA. Electronic address: candice.donaldson@cgu.edu.

Funding

NIAAA NIH HHS L30 AA024314
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe Drinking Motives Questionnaire (DMQ-R) is the most widely administered instrument to assess reasons for consuming alcohol and is conventionally premised on a four-factor structure. Recent research instead reveals that a bifactor measurement model of five motive factors (one general and four specific) represents a superior psychometric embodiment of the scale. The current study evaluated and compared the predictive validity of the four-factor and five-factor models of drinking motives in longitudinally explaining alcohol use and problems.

methodsAdult participants (N=413; age range=18-79 years) completed measures of drinking motives (Time 1) and alcohol use and problems one month later (Time 2).

resultsConfirmatory factor analyses corroborated the four-factor (social, enhancement, conformity, and coping motives) and five-factor (each item double loading on general motives and a specific motives factor) measurement structures, but the latter rendered stronger fit indices. Structural equation models revealed that lower social motives, higher enhancement motives, and higher coping motives prospectively contributed to alcohol use. Furthermore, lower social motives, higher conformity motives, higher coping motives, and greater alcohol use contributed to alcohol problems. DISCUSSION: The same set of paths emerged as significantly predictive in both models, but general motives additionally explained alcohol use and problems in the five-factor model. The incremental contribution of general motives (beyond the specific motives) on alcohol intake and detrimental consequences supports the predictive validity of the drinking reasons paradigm embodied by the inclusion of a global factor.

Indexed as

MotivationPredictive Value of TestsAdaptation, PsychologicalAdolescentAdultAgedAlcohol DrinkingFactor Analysis, StatisticalFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPsychometricsReproducibility of ResultsSocial BehaviorSurveys and QuestionnairesAlcoholBifactor analysisConfirmatory factor analysisDrinking motivesPredictive validity

Identifiers

PMID29040825
PMCPMC5683928

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.