Examining the efficacy of a personalized normative feedback intervention to reduce college student gambling
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of a stand-alone personalized normative feedback (PNF) intervention targeting misperceptions of gambling among college students.
Participants: Undergraduates (N = 136; 55% male) who reported gambling in the past 30 days were recruited between September 2011 and March 2012.
Methods: Using a randomized clinical trial design, participants were assigned to receive either PNF or an attention control task. In addition to self-report, this study used 2 computer-based risk tasks framed as "gambling opportunities" to assess cognitive and behavioral change at 1 week post intervention.
Results: After 1 week, participants receiving PNF showed a marked decrease in perception of other students' gambling, and evinced lower risk-taking performance on 2 analog measures of gambling.
Conclusions: Changes in both self-reported perceived norms and analog gambling behavior suggest that a single, stand-alone PNF intervention may modify gambling among college students. Whether it can impact gambling outside of the laboratory remains untested.
How strong is the evidence?
Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 136 participants or records.
Read the paper
Related studies
- The neurocircuitry of addiction: an overview
- Gender Differences in Human Brain: A Review
- Stratified medicine for mental disorders
- The neurobiology of drug addiction: cross-species insights into the dysfunction and recovery of the prefrontal cortex
- Annual Research Review: DNA methylation as a mediator in the association between risk exposure and child and adolescent psychopathology
- Schizophrenia: The new etiological synthesis
Go deeper in Evidence Hub
Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.