campus, as well as perceptions regarding the role of alcohol on campus (Schroeder and Prentice, 1998; Baer et al., 1991). In such interventions, a student’s alcohol use patterns are assessed, and the student is provided feedback regarding the rates of alcohol use by his or her peers. Often, the student is also provided information regarding the prevalence of his or her alcohol use pattern. Prevention strategies have used different modalities to provide this feedback, including one-on-one interviews, small groups, and such media as online web-based programs (Marlatt et al., 1995; Borsari and Carey, 2000). The variety of modalities through which this approach can be delivered may make it a viable option for wide use on campuses, rather than only with identified heavy drinkers. Additional research in this area, especially concerning the comparative effectiveness of different modes of delivery, is needed.
Motivational interviewing techniques associated with alcohol use are designed to provide an assessment of student use and provide nonjudgmental feedback regarding a person’s alcohol consumption and the negative consequences associated with use. Such techniques also often include normative feedback on peer alcohol use rates. Such interventions are designed to initiate an individual’s desire to change behavior (Miller et al., 1992). Brief motivational enhancement interventions have been found to affect problems associated with alcohol consumption, including driving after drinking, riding with an intoxicated driver, and injuries (Marlatt et al., 1998; Monti et al., 1999). Opportunities for motivational interviews are available when heavy drinkers are identified through the campus judicial system or through screening at campus health care facilities. Few campuses have programs that link heavy drinkers—even when they are identified through campus systems—to such interventions.
The integration of skills training, normative feedback, and motivational interviewing techniques has been applied to one-on-one and small group interventions in order to reduce drinking rates. These education strategies may be applied in a universal fashion with a general student population, such as first-year students who may be forming ideas (and misperceptions) about how alcohol fits into college life. In addition, these education approaches could be incorporated into programs that specifically target groups at risk for heavy drinking and individuals who, through the college judicial system or screening provided through university health care systems (see below), are identified as heavy drinkers. Research has demonstrated that this general integrated approach also reduces the negative consequences of alcohol use (Baer et al., 2001; Larimer and Cronce, 2002; Marlatt et al., 1998).