000006 Research Article self-efficacy, alcohol expectancies, and readiness to change Motivation, Wirkungserwartungen und Abstinenzzuversicht Lässt sich der Erfolg stationärer Behandlung alkoholabhängiger Patienten vorhersagen? Demmel Demmel Ralf R Dr. rer. nat.

Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Münster, Fliednerstr. 21, 48149 Münster, Germany, Tel: +49-251-83-34194, Fax: +49-251-83-31331Department of Clinical Psychology, University of Münster, Münster, Germany

demmel@psy.uni-muenster.de author Beck Beck Beate B

Westfälische Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie Münster, Münster, Germany

author Lammers Lammers André A

Westfälische Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie Münster, Münster, Germany

author German Medical Science

Düsseldorf, Köln

ALCOHOLISM psychology PATIENT ACCEPTANCE OF HEALTH CARE psychology MOTIVATION FEMALE MALE HUMAN TREATMENT OUTCOME 610 20030813 20031015 engl 1612-3174 1 German Medical Science 06 Zuversicht ist eine wesentliche Voraussetzung der erfolgreichen Behandlung von Alkoholabhängigkeit und -missbrauch. Darüber hinaus lassen die Ergebnisse zahlreicher Untersuchungen einen Zusammenhang zwischen Alkoholwirkungserwartungen und Veränderungsbereitschaft einerseits und Abstinenz andererseits vermuten. Bislang wurde jedoch nicht untersucht, inwiefern zum Beispiel Alkoholwirkungserwartungen einen stärkeren Beitrag zur Vorhersage des Behandlungserfolgs leisten als Abstinenzzuversicht und Veränderungsbereitschaft. Daher wurde die relative prognostische Relevanz dieser Faktoren an einer Stichprobe von 83 alkoholabhängigen Patienten überprüft. Veränderungsbereitschaft und Alkoholwirkungserwartungen erlaubten eine Vorhersage der Abstinenz drei Monate nach Entlassung aus stationärer Behandlung. Häufigkeit und Ausmaß des Alkoholkonsums konnten jedoch nicht vorhergesagt werden. Positive Alkoholwirkungserwartungen gingen mit geringer Zuversicht einher. Cognitive processes related to client motivation are important mediators of alcoholism treatment outcome. The present study aimed to expand previous research on client motivation and treatment outcome by establishing the predictive utility of self-efficacy, alcohol expectancies, and readiness to change in a sample of alcohol-dependent inpatients (N = 83). Treatment outcome was assessed three months following discharge. According to self-reported alcohol use, 22 clients were classified as abstainers and 41 clients as relapsers. Twenty participants were lost to follow-up. Readiness to change and anticipated reinforcement from alcohol predicted abstinence at follow-up. Client motivation was unrelated to both frequency and quantity of alcohol use. In accordance with social learning theory, self-efficacy was inversely correlated with alcohol expectancies. The results of the present study suggest that once abstinence has been violated factors other than pretreatment motivation determine drinking behavior. IntroductionCognitive processes related to client motivation are important mediators of alcoholism treatment outcome . Both social learning theory and the transtheoretical model of intentional behavior change provide a general framework for research on client motivation. A number of studies established the relationship between treatment outcome on the one hand and self-efficacy , alcohol expectancies , and readiness to change on the other. However, virtually nothing is known about the relative utility of these variables in predicting treatment outcome.Self-efficacy is a key concept in social learning theory. Bandura defines self-efficacy as "people's judgments of their capabilities to organize and execute courses of action required to attain designated types of performances" (p. 391). In the addiction field the term self-efficacy refers to the individual's expectancy to resist the urge to use drugs in a stressful or "high-risk" situation . According to Marlatt and Gordon , high self-efficacy is closely related to successful coping behavior. Cognitive-behavioral treatment programs including some form of coping skills training appear to enhance the client's self-efficacy . Likewise, interventions adapted from motivational interviewing seek to strengthen "the client's confidence in his or her capability to cope with obstacles" (p. 41). In line with social learning theory, drinking refusal self-efficacy has been shown to increase during the course of treatment and to predict treatment outcome .Outcome expectancy has been proposed as another important determinant of behavior change by social learning theory . Alcohol outcome expectancies, i.e. the short-term effects of alcohol consumption anticipated by an individual, have been shown to predict initiation of drinking during adolescence , transition from non-problem to problem drinking , and relapse following treatment for alcohol dependence . The relationship between outcome expectancies and self-efficacy has been a source of confusion and controversy . Bandura emphasizes that outcome expectancies are determined primarily by self-efficacy expectancies. Consequently, alcohol expectancies should be less powerful in predicting treatment outcome than self-efficacy. However, alcohol expectancies are related to a variety of factors including personality , setting , and the anticipated blood alcohol concentration . Therefore, outcome expectancies may be important independent predictors of drinking behavior.The transtheoretical model of intentional behavior change assumes that intentional behavior change involves passing through a sequence of discrete stages. Based on the results of numerous studies and previous versions of the model, Prochaska et al. described five stages of change: (1) precontemplation, (2) contemplation, (3) preparation, (4) action, and (5) maintenance. According to Prochaska et al. , individuals addicted to psychotropic drugs typically recycle through these stages several times before achieving sustained long-term behavior change. A number of self-administered questionnaires have been developed to assess an individual's "readiness to change" and to assign clients to particular stages of change [8]. The stages of change approach has been criticized for a variety of reasons. For example, it has been stated that the transtheoretical model describes arbitrary pseudo-stages , , . However, in a previous study based on the self-reports of 125 alcoholism treatment clients, readiness to change predicted abstinence at 12-month follow-up . In another study using the Readiness to Change Questionnaire (RCQ ) and the Negative Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire (NAEQ ) to assess client motivation, both readiness to change and alcohol expectancies were related to treatment outcome . However, the results of this study should be interpreted with caution for two reasons. First, the RCQ was designed to measure client motivation in primary health care settings . Second, the NAEQ items describe not only negative alcohol expectancies, but also consequences of long-term alcohol abuse and symptoms of problem drinking (e.g., "If I continued to drink at my present level, then I would end up in hospital."). Including such items is very likely to increase variance explained .The present study aims to expand the research on client motivation and treatment outcome by establishing the relative utility of self-efficacy, alcohol expectancies, and readiness to change in predicting drinking behavior following inpatient treatment for alcohol dependence. Furthermore, the relationship between expectancies and readiness to change is examined. MethodsParticipantsNinety-three volunteers from an inpatient treatment unit of a psychiatric hospital (Westfälische Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie Münster) participated in this study. Over a period of three months (mid-January to mid-April 2001) subjects were selected from successive admissions for participation in the study if they met the following criteria: (1) alcohol dependence according to ICD-10 ; (2) maximum age of 60 years; (3) no cognitive or verbal impairment; (4) no primary diagnosis of drug dependence (including dependence on illicit drugs, sedatives, hypnotics or anxiolytics); (5) resident of the local community. Ninety-three individuals admitted to the hospital did not meet these criteria. In addition, 20 patients declined to participate in the study. Ten subjects were excluded from the study due to incomplete data. The final sample consisted of 83 inpatients (mean age of 43.67 years, SD = 8.41). Of the sample, 81% were male, 23% were married, and 53% were currently unemployed. The majority of the entire sample (90%) reported at least one previous detoxification (mean number of previous detoxifications = 9.95, Mdn = 4.5, SD = 14.57, Max = 80, information was not provided by one subject). Sixty-nine subjects (83%) were self-described smokers.ProceduresSubjects participated in a multi-site study on the outcome of short-term inpatient treatment . The mean length of inpatient stay was 11.94 days (Mdn = 10, Min = 2, Max = 41, SD = 6.78). Within five days following admission, patients were invited to participate in the study. Written informed consent was obtained and subjects completed a number of questionnaires including the Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire (AEQ ), the Drug Taking Confidence Questionnaire (DTCQ ), and the Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES ). The AEQ and the DTCQ were administered at the Münster site only. A standardized clinical interview was administered by advanced undergraduate students or staff members to all participants to assess sociodemographic background, alcohol consumption, and the number of previous detoxifications. By the time of baseline assessment all subjects were completely detoxified (blood alcohol concentration was zero) and free from clinically significant symptoms of acute alcohol withdrawal. Treatment outcome was assessed approximately 90 days following discharge (M = 91.1, Mdn = 90, Min = 76, Max = 117, SD = 7.58). Again, a standardized clinical interview was administered by advanced undergraduate students or staff members via telephone or in person.At both baseline and follow-up alcohol use was assessed using the following measures: (1) the number of drinking days during the month preceding the interview (frequency), (2) the average number of drinks (beer, wine or liquor) per day in the week preceding admission/follow-up (quantity). Responses to the quantity item were transformed into grams of pure alcohol. At follow-up two groups of subjects were defined according to their reports of alcohol use during the 3-month follow-up period. Subjects were classified either as abstainers (reporting no alcohol use at all during the follow-up period) or relapsers (having had at least one drink of alcohol during the follow-up period). All statistical analyses were performed with the SPSS software package (Version 11.0). Only complete questionnaires (no missing data) were entered into analysis.MeasuresAlcohol Expectancy Questionnaire. A German-language version of the AEQ (AEQ-G ) was used to assess alcohol outcome expectancies. The AEQ-G comprises 19 items describing anticipated reinforcement from alcohol (the AEQ-G is available online at http://wwwpsy.uni-muenster.de/institut1/ehes/startseite.htm). Participants are asked to agree or disagree with each statement (dichotomous response format). Factor analysis established two AEQ-G subscales. The first factor (nine items) represents the anticipation of increased social assertiveness (Cronbach's alpha = 0.90). Factor two (ten items) describes alcohol-induced tension reduction and mood management (Cronbach's alpha = 0.70).Drug Taking Confidence Questionnaire. A German-language version of the DTCQ (DTCQ-G ) was used to assess drinking refusal self-efficacy. The DTCQ-G comprises 32 items representing a variety of high-risk situations. Participants rate their confidence in their ability to resist the urge to drink on a 6-point scale ranging from "0" (not at all confident) to "100" (very confident). Factor analysis suggested a single factor solution (Cronbach's alpha = 0.97).Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale. A German-language version of the SOCRATES (SOCRATES-G , ) was used to assess client motivation in accordance with the transtheoretical model. The SOCRATES-G comprises 19 items reflecting readiness to change drinking behavior. Clients are asked to indicate the extent of their agreement with each statement on a 5-point Likert-type scale. The factor structure of the SOCRATES-G corresponds almost completely to that of the original version. Factor analysis established three subscales: (1) Taking Steps (Cronbach's alpha = 0.84), (2) Recognition (Cronbach's alpha = 0.78), and (3) Ambivalence (Cronbach's alpha = 0.68). According to Miller and Tonigan [38], these factors reflect "continuously distributed motivational processes that may underlie stages of change" (p. 84).Intake and follow-up interview. A standardized clinical interview was administered at baseline and follow-up to assess sociodemographic background, alcohol consumption, and the number of previous detoxifications. This interview included items adapted from a German-language version of the Addiction Severity Index , . ResultsCorrelations (Pearson correlation coefficient) among baseline measures ranged from r = −0.51 to r = 0.50 . Sixty-three participants completed follow-up interviews. More than half of the follow-up interviews (56%) were administered via telephone. According to self-reported alcohol use, 22 clients were classified as abstainers and 41 clients as relapsers. Twenty participants were lost to follow-up. These clients did not differ on any baseline measure from those located for follow-up. Three separate stepwise multiple regression analyses (forward inclusion) were conducted to examine the relationship between measures of client motivation (DTCQ-G total score; AEQ-G total score, SOCRATES-G subscores) and treatment outcome (abstinence, frequency of alcohol use, quantity of alcohol use). Stepwise regression was chosen in order to select significant predictors of treatment outcome empirically without favouring one theoretical model over the other. Readiness to change (Taking Steps) and anticipated reinforcement from alcohol (AEQ-G total score) predicted abstinence at follow-up . The overall model accounted for 18.6% of the variance in treatment outcome (relapse vs. no relapse). Client motivation was unrelated to both frequency and quantity of alcohol use. DiscussionThe primary purpose of the present study was to examine the relationship between client motivation and treatment outcome. For the first time, the relative predictive utility of self-efficacy, alcohol expectancies, and readiness to change was studied in a sample of alcohol-dependent inpatients. Both alcohol expectancies and readiness to change were related to abstinence following inpatient treatment for alcohol dependence. These findings are in accordance with the results of previous research , . Neither outcome expectancies nor readiness to change predicted treatment outcome in terms of frequency and quantity of alcohol use. Once abstinence has been violated factors other than pretreatment motivation appear to determine both frequency and quantity of alcohol use . Contrary to past research, self-efficacy was not related to treatment outcome. Given the relatively consistent findings of previous studies , this result should be viewed as tentative. End-of-treatment self-efficacy or changes of self-efficacy over the course of treatment might be more powerful predictors of recovery from alcohol problems.Correlations between expectancies and readiness to change were low to modest. However, self-efficacy was substantially correlated with positive alcohol expectancies. In line with social learning theory and previous expectancy research based on the self-reports of college students [6], low confidence was associated with the anticipation of reinforcement from alcohol. The relationship of alcohol expectancies to both treatment outcome and self-efficacy highlights the potential clinical utility of assessing outcome expectancies. Interventions designed to alter the expectancies of alcohol-dependent individuals may be a useful extension of substance abuse treatment. Past efforts to change alcohol expectancies in non-clinical samples produced mixed results , . Certainly, simply providing straight-forward information about the short-term effects of alcohol is unlikely to change the highly persistent expectancies of alcohol-dependent individuals .Taking Steps was the only SOCRATES subscale related to treatment outcome. Those clients scoring high on Taking Steps - and presumably ready to change - were more likely to be abstinent three months following discharge. It appears to be counter-intuitive that readiness to change predicted success in a sample of alcohol-dependent inpatients since all participants had entered treatment and had thus already initiated behavior change. However, alcoholism treatment clients differ considerably with respect to their readiness to change . Despite a long-term history of alcoholism as indicated by a great number of previous detoxifications, inpatient treatment might have been inappropriate for many clients since it did not correspond to their stage of change. The negative correlation between readiness to change and the number of previous detoxifications clearly contradicts a "bottoming out" approach .Some limitations should be considered when interpreting the results of the present study. First, the small sample size and the relatively high number of subjects lost to follow-up may have limited the ability to detect relationships between measures of client motivation and treatment outcome. Second, approximately half of the follow-up interviews were administered via telephone. Third, evaluation of treatment outcome was based exclusively on self-reported alcohol use. However, past research supports the validity of telephone interviews and information provided by alcohol-dependent inpatients , .Future research may address a number of issues related to client motivation and treatment outcome. First, further studies are needed to determine the relationship between negative alcohol expectancies, e.g. anticipated motor and cognitive impairment, and treatment outcome. In previous studies negative alcohol expectancies have been either ignored or confounded with long-term consequences of problem drinking . Second, more frequent and real time assessment of client motivation over the course of treatment and following discharge will increase the ability to predict relapse . However, resources may limit the number of assessments and the use of advanced technologies such as palm-top computers. Finally, virtually nothing is known about the concurrent validity of multi-dimensional assessment instruments such as the SOCRATES on the one hand and single item algorithms or visual analogue scales on the other . The development and validation of simple measures may encourage the assessment of client motivation in substance abuse treatment. AcknowledgementsThis research was supported by the Landschaftsverband Westfalen-Lippe. The authors wish to thank Jutta Hagen, Kelley Kucaba, Jennifer Nicolai, and Alexander L. Gerlach for their helpful comments on drafts of this article. Aas HN, Leigh BC, Anderssen N, Jakobsen R Two-year longitudinal study of alcohol expectancies and drinking among Norwegian adolescents 1998 Addiction 373-84 Aas HN, Leigh BC, Anderssen N, Jakobsen R. Two-year longitudinal study of alcohol expectancies and drinking among Norwegian adolescents. Addiction 1998;93:373-84. Bandura A. 1986 Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action: a social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall; 1986. Bandura A Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory 1998 Psychol Health 623-49 Bandura A. Health promotion from the perspective of social cognitive theory. Psychol Health 1998;13:623-49. Brown SA. Reinforcement expectancies and alcoholism treatment outcome after a one-year follow-up 1985 J Stud Alcohol 304-8 Brown SA. Reinforcement expectancies and alcoholism treatment outcome after a one-year follow-up. J Stud Alcohol 1985;46:304-8. Brown SA, Goldman MS, Inn A, Anderson LR Expectations of reinforcement from alcohol: Their domain and relation to drinking patterns 1980 J Consult Clin Psychol 419-26 Brown SA, Goldman MS, Inn A, Anderson LR. Expectations of reinforcement from alcohol: Their domain and relation to drinking patterns. J Consult Clin Psychol 1980;48:419-26. Burke RS, Stephens RS Effect of anxious affect on drinking self-efficacy in college students 1997 Psychol Addict Behav 65-75 Burke RS, Stephens RS. Effect of anxious affect on drinking self-efficacy in college students. Psychol Addict Behav 1997;11:65-75. Burling TA, Reilly PM, Moltzen JO, Ziff DC Self-efficacy and relapse among inpatient drug and alcohol abusers: A predictor of outcome 1989 J Stud Alcohol 354-60 Burling TA, Reilly PM, Moltzen JO, Ziff DC. Self-efficacy and relapse among inpatient drug and alcohol abusers: a predictor of outcome. J Stud Alcohol 1989;50:354-60. Carey KB, Purnine DM, Maisto SA, Carey MP Assessing readiness to change substance abuse: A critical review of instruments. 1999 Clin Psychol: Science and Practice 245-66 Carey KB, Purnine DM, Maisto SA, Carey MP. Assessing readiness to change substance abuse: a critical review of instruments. Clin Psychol: Science and Practice 1999;6:245-66. Chermack ST, Singer K, Beresford TP Screening for alcoholism among medical inpatients: How important is corroboration of patient self-report? 1998 Alcohol: Clin Exp Res 1393-8 Chermack ST, Singer K, Beresford TP. Screening for alcoholism among medical inpatients: How important is corroboration of patient self-report? Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1998;22:1393-8. Christiansen BA, Smith GT, Roehling PV, Goldman MS Using alcohol expectancies to predict adolescent drinking behavior after one year 1989 J Consult Clin Psychol 93-9 Christiansen BA, Smith GT, Roehling PV, Goldman MS. Using alcohol expectancies to predict adolescent drinking behavior after one year. J Consult Clin Psychol 1989;57:93-9. Cohen BB, Vinson DC Retrospective self-report of alcohol consumption: Test-retest reliability by telephone 1995 Alcohol Clin Exp Res 1156-61 Cohen BB, Vinson DC. Retrospective self-report of alcohol consumption: Test-retest reliability by telephone. Alcohol: Clin Exp Res 1995;19:1156-61. Darkes J, Goldman MS Expectancy challenge and drinking reduction: Process and structure in the alcohol expectancy network 1998 Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 64-76 Darkes J, Goldman MS. Expectancy challenge and drinking reduction: process and structure in the alcohol expectancy network. Exp Clin Psychopharmacol 1998;6:64-76. Davidson R The transtheoretical model: A critical overview 1998 Treating addictive behaviors 25-38 Davidson R. The transtheoretical model: a critical overview. In: Miller WR, Heather N, editors. Treating addictive behaviors. 2nd ed. New York: Plenum Press; 1998. p. 25-38. Demmel R, Beck B, Richter D, Reker T Readiness to change in a clinical sample of problem drinkers: Relation to alcohol use, self-efficacy, and treatment outcome 2003 Europ Addict Res In press Demmel R, Beck B, Richter D, Reker T. Readiness to change in a clinical sample of problem drinkers: Relation to alcohol use, self-efficacy, and treatment outcome. Europ Addict Res. In press 2003. Demmel R, Rist F, Olbrich R Selbstwirksamkeitserwartungen alkoholabhängiger Patienten im ersten Jahr nach stationärer Behandlung 2001 Rehabilitation Suchtkranker - mehr als Psychotherapie Demmel R, Rist F, Olbrich R. Selbstwirksamkeitserwartungen alkoholabhängiger Patienten im ersten Jahr nach stationärer Behandlung. In: Fachverband Sucht e.V., editor. Rehabilitation Suchtkranker - mehr als Psychotherapie. Geesthacht: Neuland; 2001. p. 221-7. Demmel R, Hagen J Faktorenstruktur und psychometrische Eigenschaften einer gekürzten deutschsprachigen Version des Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire (Brief AEQ-G) 2002 Z Different Diagnost Psychol 205-16 Demmel R, Hagen J. Faktorenstruktur und psychometrische Eigenschaften einer gekürzten deutschsprachigen Version des Alcohol Expectancy Questionnaire (Brief AEQ-G). Z Different Diagnost Psychol 2002;23:205-16. DiClemente CC, Fairhurst SK, Piotrowski NA Self-efficacy and addictive behaviors 1995 Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application 109-41 DiClemente CC, Fairhurst SK, Piotrowski NA. Self-efficacy and addictive behaviors. In: Maddux JE, editor. Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application. New York: Plenum Press; 1995. p. 109-41. Dilling H, Mombour W, Schmidt MH 1991 Internationale Klassifikation psychischer Störungen: ICD-10, Kapitel V (F), klinisch-diagnostische Leitlinien Dilling H, Mombour W, Schmidt MH. Internationale Klassifikation psychischer Störungen: ICD-10, Kapitel V (F), klinisch-diagnostische Leitlinien, Weltgesundheitsorganisation. Bern: Huber; 1991. Earleywine M, Martin CS Anticipated stimulant and sedative effects of alcohol vary with dosage and limb of the blood alcohol curve 1993 Alcohol Clin Exp Res 135-9 Earleywine M, Martin CS. Anticipated stimulant and sedative effects of alcohol vary with dosage and limb of the blood alcohol curve. Alcohol: Clin Exp Res 1993;17:135-9. Galen LW, Henderson MJ, Whitman RD The utility of novelty seeking, harm avoidance, and expectancy in the prediction of drinking 1997 Addict Behav 93-106 Galen LW, Henderson MJ, Whitman RD. The utility of novelty seeking, harm avoidance, and expectancy in the prediction of drinking. Addict Behav 1997;22:93-106. Glatt MM. Today's enjoyment - tomorrow's dependency: The road towards the rock-bottom and the way back 1975 Br J Addict Alcohol Other Drugs 25-34 Glatt MM. Today's enjoyment - tomorrow's dependency. The road towards the rock-bottom and the way back. Br J Addict Alcohol Other Drugs 1975;70 Suppl 1:25-34. Goldbeck R, Myatt P, Aitchison T End-of-treatment self-efficacy: A predictor of abstinence 1997 Addiction 313-24 Goldbeck R, Myatt P, Aitchison T. End-of-treatment self-efficacy: a predictor of abstinence. Addiction 1997;92:313-24. Grube JW, Chen M-J, Madden P, Morgan M Predicting adolescent drinking from alcohol expectancy values: A comparison of additive, interactive, and nonlinear models 1995 J Appl Soc Psychol 839-57 Grube JW, Chen M-J, Madden P, Morgan M. Predicting adolescent drinking from alcohol expectancy values: a comparison of additive, interactive, and nonlinear models. J Appl Soc Psychol 1995;25:839-57. Gsellhofer B, Küfner H, Vogt M, Weiler D 1999 European Addiction Severity Index: EuropASI Gsellhofer B, Küfner H, Vogt M, Weiler D. European Addiction Severity Index: EuropASI. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren; 1999. Gustafson R Can straight-forward information change alcohol-related expectancies? 1986 Percept Mot Skills 937-8 Gustafson R. Can straight-forward information change alcohol-related expectancies? Percept Mot Skills 1986;63:937-8. Hewes RL, Janikowski TP Readiness for change and treatment outcome among individuals with alcohol dependency 1998 Rehabil Couns Bull 76-93 Hewes RL, Janikowski TP. Readiness for change and treatment outcome among individuals with alcohol dependency. Rehabil Couns Bull 1998;42:76-93. Isenhart CE Pretreatment readiness for change in male alcohol dependent subjects: Predictors of one-year follow-up status 1997 J Stud Alcohol 351-7 Isenhart CE. Pretreatment readiness for change in male alcohol dependent subjects: predictors of one-year follow-up status. J Stud Alcohol 1997;58:351-7. Ito JR, Donovan DM, Hall JJ Relapse prevention in alcohol aftercare: Effects on drinking outcome, change process, and aftercare attendance 1988 Br J Addict 171-81 Ito JR, Donovan DM, Hall JJ. Relapse prevention in alcohol aftercare: effects on drinking outcome, change process, and aftercare attendance. Br J Addict 1988;83:171-81. Jones BT, Corbin W, Fromme K A review of expectancy theory and alcohol consumption 2001 Addiction 57-72 Jones BT, Corbin W, Fromme K. A review of expectancy theory and alcohol consumption. Addiction 2001;96:57-72. Jones BT, McMahon J Negative and positive alcohol expectancies as predictors of abstinence after discharge from a residential treatment program: a one-month and three-month follow-up study in men 1994 J Stud Alcohol 543-8 Jones BT, McMahon J. Negative and positive alcohol expectancies as predictors of abstinence after discharge from a residential treatment program: a one-month and three-month follow-up study in men. J Stud Alcohol 1994;55:543-8. Maddux JE Self-efficacy theory: An introduction 1995 Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application 3-33 Maddux JE. Self-efficacy theory: An introduction. In: Maddux JE, editor. Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application. New York: Plenum Press; 1995. p. 3-33. Maddux JE, Norton LW, Stoltenberg CD Self-efficacy expectancy, outcome expectancy, and outcome value: Relative effects on behavioral intentions 1986 J Pers Soc Psychol 783-9 Maddux JE, Norton LW, Stoltenberg CD. Self-efficacy expectancy, outcome expectancy, and outcome value: Relative effects on behavioral intentions. J Pers Soc Psychol 1986;51:783-9. Maisto SA, Carey KB, Bradizza CM Social learning theory 1999 Psychological theories of drinking and alcoholism 106-63 Maisto SA, Carey KB, Bradizza CM. Social learning theory. In: Leonard KE, Blane HT, editors. Psychological theories of drinking and alcoholism. New York: Guilford Press; 1999. p. 106-63. Marlatt GA, Gordon JR 1985 Relapse prevention: Maintenance strategies in the treatment of addictive behaviors Marlatt GA, Gordon JR, editors. Relapse prevention: maintenance strategies in the treatment of addictive behaviors. New York: Guilford Press; 1985. McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, O'Brien CP An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients. The Addiction Severity Index 1980 J Nerv Ment Dis 26-33 McLellan AT, Luborsky L, Woody GE, O'Brien CP. An improved diagnostic evaluation instrument for substance abuse patients. The Addiction Severity Index. J Nerv Ment Dis 1980;168:26-33. McMahon J, Jones BT Post-treatment abstinence survivorship and motivation for recovery: The predictive validity of the Readiness to Change (RCQ) and Negative Alcohol Expectancy (NAEQ) Questionnaires 1996 Addict Res 161-76 McMahon J, Jones BT. Post-treatment abstinence survivorship and motivation for recovery: The predictive validity of the Readiness to Change (RCQ) and Negative Alcohol Expectancy (NAEQ) Questionnaires. Addict Res 1996:4:161-76. Miller WR, Rollnick S 2002 Motivational interviewing: Preparing people for change Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational interviewing: preparing people for change. New York: Guilford Press; 2002. Miller WR, Tonigan JS Assessing drinkers' motivations for change: The Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES) 1996 Psychol Addict Behav 81-9 Miller WR, Tonigan JS. Assessing drinkers' motivations for change: The Stages of Change Readiness and Treatment Eagerness Scale (SOCRATES). Psychol Addict Behav 1996;10:81-9. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC, Norcross JC In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors 1992 Am Psychol 1102-14 Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC, Norcross JC. In search of how people change: Applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol 1992;47:1102-14. Reker T, Richter D, Bätz B, Luedtke U, Koritsch HD, Reymann G Kurzfristige Effekte der stationären Akutbehandlung alkoholabhängiger Patienten - eine prospektive, multizentrische Evaluationsstudie In press Nervenarzt Reker T, Richter D, Bätz B, Luedtke U, Koritsch HD, Reymann G. Kurzfristige Effekte der stationären Akutbehandlung alkoholabhängiger Patienten - eine prospektive, multizentrische Evaluationsstudie. Nervenarzt. In press. Rollnick S Readiness, importance, and confidence: Critical conditions of change in treatment 1998 Treating addictive behaviors 49-60 Rollnick S. Readiness, importance, and confidence: Critical conditions of change in treatment. In: Miller WR, Heather N, editors. Treating addictive behaviors. 2nd ed. New York: Plenum Press; 1998. p. 49-60. Rollnick S, Heather N, Gold R, Hall W Development of a short "readiness to change" questionnaire for use in brief, opportunistic interventions among excessive drinkers 1992 Br J Addict 743-54 Rollnick S, Heather N, Gold R, Hall W. Development of a short "readiness to change" questionnaire for use in brief, opportunistic interventions among excessive drinkers. Br J Addict 1992;87:743-54. Rychtarik RG, Prue DM, Rapp SR, King AC Self-efficacy, aftercare and relapse in a treatment program for alcoholics 1992 J Stud Alcohol 435-40 Rychtarik RG, Prue DM, Rapp SR, King AC. Self-efficacy, aftercare and relapse in a treatment program for alcoholics. J Stud Alcohol 1992;53:435-40. Shiffman S, Balabanis MH, Paty JA, Engberg J, Gwaltney CJ, Liu KS, Gnys M, Hickcox M, Paton SM Dynamic effects of self-efficacy on smoking lapse and relapse 2000 Health Psychol 315-23 Shiffman S, Balabanis MH, Paty JA, Engberg J, Gwaltney CJ, Liu KS, Gnys M, Hickcox M, Paton SM. Dynamic effects of self-efficacy on smoking lapse and relapse. Health Psychol 2000;19:315-23. Sklar SM, Annis HM, Turner NE Development and validation of the Drug-Taking Confidence Questionnaire: a measure of coping self-efficacy 1997 Addict Behav 655-70 Sklar SM, Annis HM, Turner NE. Development and validation of the Drug-Taking Confidence Questionnaire: a measure of coping self-efficacy. Addict Behav 1997;22:655-70. Stott NC, Rollnick S, Rees MR, Pill RM Innovation in clinical method: diabetes care and negotiating skills 1995 Fam Pract 413-8 Stott NC, Rollnick S, Rees MR, Pill RM. Innovation in clinical method: diabetes care and negotiating skills. Fam Pract 1995;12:413-8. Wall AM, McKee SA, Hinson RE, Goldstein A Examining alcohol outcome expectancies in laboratory and naturalistic bar settings: A within-subject experimental analysis 2001 Psychol Addict Behav 219-26 Wall AM, McKee SA, Hinson RE, Goldstein A. Examining alcohol outcome expectancies in laboratory and naturalistic bar settings: a within-subject experimental analysis. Psychol Addict Behav 2001;15:219-26. Weinstein ND, Rothman AJ, Sutton SR Stage theories of health behavior: Conceptual and methodological issues 1998 Health Psychol 290-9 Weinstein ND, Rothman AJ, Sutton SR. Stage theories of health behavior: conceptual and methodological issues. Health Psychol 1998;17:290-9. Wetterling T, Veltrup C 1997 Diagnostik und Therapie von Alkoholproblemen: Ein Leitfaden Wetterling T, Veltrup C. Diagnostik und Therapie von Alkoholproblemen: ein Leitfaden. Berlin: Springer; 1997. 11

Table 1: Correlations Among Baseline Measures (Pearson correlation coefficient r)

22

Table 2: Summary of Logistic Regression Analysis Predicting Abstinence

2 0