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

Research output: Contribution to journalReview ArticleResearchpeer-review

103 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 languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)141-158
Number of pages18
JournalJournal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment
Volume27
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Sep 2005
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Alcohol
  • Assessment
  • Expectancy
  • Psychometrics
  • Valuation

Cite this

@article{01976f13a4684ac8b029acbc95cf5924,
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.",
keywords = "Alcohol, Assessment, Expectancy, Psychometrics, Valuation",
author = "Ham, {Lindsay S.} and Stewart, {Sherry H.} and Norton, {Peter J.} and Hope, {Debra A.}",
year = "2005",
month = "9",
day = "1",
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-Verlag London Ltd.",
number = "3",

}

Psychometric assessment of the comprehensive effects of alcohol questionnaire : Comparing a brief version to the original full scale. / Ham, Lindsay S.; Stewart, Sherry H.; Norton, Peter J.; Hope, Debra A.

In: Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment, Vol. 27, No. 3, 01.09.2005, p. 141-158.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview ArticleResearchpeer-review

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.

PY - 2005/9/1

Y1 - 2005/9/1

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.

KW - Alcohol

KW - Assessment

KW - Expectancy

KW - Psychometrics

KW - Valuation

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

U2 - 10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9

DO - 10.1007/s10862-005-0631-9

M3 - Review Article

VL - 27

SP - 141

EP - 158

JO - Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment

JF - Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment

SN - 0882-2689

IS - 3

ER -