ArticleDrug and alcohol dependence2019
Examining motivational interviewing's effect on confidence and commitment using daily data.
Article in Drug and alcohol dependence, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Day-Level Mediators of Change in Brief Motivational Intervention for Alcohol Use and Liver Health.Research square · 2026Article
- Alleviating psychosocial distress in drug-resistant tuberculosis: a pre-post study on telephone-delivered motivational interviewing.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Adaptive Text Messaging for Postpartum Risky Drinking: Conceptual Model and Protocol for an Ecological Momentary Assessment Study.JMIR research protocols · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Mechanisms of behavior change (MOBC) within Motivational Interviewing (MI) are thought to operate via both relational and technical elements. These elements are hypothesized to increase client motivation and self-efficacy for change and subsequently decrease drinking. Only partial support for this causal chain exists, particularly when using within-session change talk as the primary intervening variable. This study explored whether commitment to moderate or abstain from drinking and confidence to moderate drinking in the next day measured via ecological momentary assessment (EMA) provided alternative support for the theory. Data were from a pilot randomized controlled trial testing active ingredients of MI. Problem drinkers (N = 89) seeking to moderate their drinking were randomly assigned to one of the three conditions: 1) MI; 2) Spirit only MI (SOMI), consisting of non-directive elements of MI, e.g., reflective listening; and 3) a non-therapy control. Participants completed daily EMA that measured confidence, both types of commitment, and drinks per day for a week prior to and during seven weeks of treatment. Hypotheses were not supported, and results were unexpected. Participants in SOMI were more likely to have higher daily confidence than those in MI; there were no condition differences for either type of commitment. All daily measures significantly predicted drinking; however, the MI group did not demonstrate a stronger relationship between the intervening variables and drinking, as hypothesized. Instead, participants in SOMI yielded the strongest relationship between daily commitment to abstain and drinking compared to the other two conditions. Multiple possible explanations for the unexpected findings are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.